Comments by "Anony Mousse" (@anon_y_mousse) on "New Linux Kernel (It's Starting To Get Rusty)" video.

  1. Yeah, because that's what you want at the kernel level, a bunch of newbies who don't know what they're doing and falsely believe that the language they've been goaded into using will make their code safe.
    19
  2.  @tommyscottish7284  Slightly faster and a massive fuckton smaller.
    7
  3.  @thewitheredstriker  I don't know if it's a minority or it's just that Rustaceans are hyper vocal cvnts.
    6
  4. He's got his work cut out for him, they're insane.
    6
  5.  @jacksonbourne  Yeah, don't use the standard, easy, clear, concise method, use this new one which is safe and tells you it's safe by requiring all of these extra keywords. You know, instead of making the standard, easy, clear and concise method safer.
    6
  6.  @hwstar9416  No, you can use a JavaScript to C translator and then compile that. Won't make it as good as writing directly in C, but it'll compile to machine code.
    5
  7. I very much doubt that's even close to reality. My computer is brand new and could actually be used to game. I use Linux because I desire freedom, both mentally and electronically. You can cope with whatever cage you're in.
    4
  8.  @bonbonpony  Before I deleted the rust compiler it was up to 20gb. I may not bother to reinstall it.
    3
  9. I completely understand. The more I learn of its community the more I wish it were erased from the face of the Earth.
    3
  10.  @Chris-on5bt  Right, so instead of returning a multitude of error codes so you can diagnose what went wrong, you get a useless boolean and have to do even more work. Worse yet, it slows everything down. The C method is better, you have a series of macros that define all the possible error conditions. So when something goes wrong and you check the return code, you know what went wrong instead of merely where.
    2
  11.  @Manja500  Sure, write code that doesn't panic. Then what? It'll be convoluted code that looks worse than C and doesn't work any better or faster and provides none of the guarantees that it said it would which is a huge part of why it was being tried in the first place. Better to just stick with C and write cleaner code in the idiomatic C way. Also, don't fall into the trap of thinking your code is safe because you write it in X language of choice.
    2
  12. Don't worry. The brainpower of most Rustaceans couldn't power an Arduino, let alone will they take over and make knowledge of C++ outdated. Besides, C++ is being updated continually and you should really look into some of the features from C++ 11, 17 and 20.
    2
  13.  @PeakKissShot  Okay, what organizations use it? How large is their desktop user base? What hardware can it run on?
    2
  14. I know, right? I could wrap LLVM with a disgusting new language too and get the same supposed safety.
    2
  15. As a quasi-human, I hate you.
    1
  16.  @gagagero  It kind of is. You have to check for an error then acquire some kind of result from it. So it's a two step process whether you want that or not.
    1
  17.  @vladlu6362  Uh huh, sure. So when you're forced to check for an error you know won't happen, which will make your code slower, the errno method means you don't have to check and your code can run faster. In a critical inner loop that matters. You might need to check for debug code, but Rust will make you check always unless you write a lot more garbage. So either easier to use when you know what you're doing, or harder to use because that's "safe", despite it not actually protecting you from every error. If that's too much for your tiny brain, let's simplify it: C method safer and cleaner, Rust method not safer, not cleaner, more annoying.
    1
  18.  @Chris-on5bt  I already know how it returns, and it's a boolean error condition. Which means you have to do further debugging to get the type of error. If you don't understand that then you've failed to understand why it's wrong. A two path switch isn't as useful as a 20 or 30 path switch that will tell you what error occurred.
    1
  19.  @Chris-on5bt  Or we can directly jump where we need to go instead of having a two step process for determining if there was an error then process that result.
    1
  20.  @gagagero  The type of result changes based on there being an error or not, that's the very definition of forcing two steps on you.
    1
  21. Keep learning C, it's a better language if you know how to use it correctly.
    1
  22. No.
    1
  23.  @vei_bean  Convenient is fixing indexing so you can just use it and not have to care. Doing it the way they suggest doing it is convoluted garbage. It's not a matter of perspective.
    1
  24.  @vladlu6362  Sadly yes, but there's a lot less of them and even they tend to be smarter than Rust newbies.
    1
  25.  @diadetediotedio6918  Again with that stupid nonsensical argument. Who cares what Microsoft says about anything, we're talking about Linux as well as a programming language that Microsoft currently has no control over. I don't even know what you're responding to because it was either deleted or from another thread, along with your own prior post. Linus only considered using Rust because the toxic Rustaceans bullied him into it and when it falls flat on its face like C++ did they'll kick it to the curb. A kernel needs intelligent developers, and setting aside the unintelligent ones already developing for it (*cough* Nvidia devs *cough*), Rustaceans don't qualify.
    1
  26.  @vladlu6362  Reading comprehension doesn't seem to be a strong suit of Rustaceans. I guess that's why you need it to be your savior because you'd never make it as an actual programmer.
    1
  27. 20gb on my system before I saved the space.
    1
  28.  @localboxcrox  You've repeatedly misspelled FreeBSD, so I don't believe you. Fucking copy pasta bullshit.
    1