Now that we're almost to an all Rust DE, how long, do you think, will it take till someone throws an all Rust distro out there? Given no "AI" takes over everything variable, i'd say at least before 2030.
Now that we're almost to an all Rust DE, how long, do you think, will it take till someone throws an all Rust distro out there?
one already exists, and it's developed by the same guy developing cosmic
Exactly. And they are making good progress: https://redox-os.org/news/
Also, Servo development got picked up again last year by Igalia: https://servo.org/blog/
Imagine a Rust OS running a Rust browser. It would be more secure, reliable and faster than any proprietary alternatives. No more memory corruption vulnerabilities, no more browser tabs taking 1 GB because of shitty C code needing ridiculous sandboxing, all programs being able to make use of concurrency safely, backporting efforts mostly unneeded thanks to massively decreased CVE count... it would be a big win on all fronts for FOSS and independent developers, because our current C systems involve a lot of constant security maintenance, fuzzing and effort that in the end only companies can afford in a sustainable way.
>because our current C systems involve a lot of constant security maintenance, fuzzing and effort that in the end only companies can afford in a sustainable way.
Rust will have vulnerabilities too. The difference is that it'll be at the language/compiler level, which means when an exploit is found it'll likely be easily reproducible across all systems.
That isn't the case for C since, being a more malleable language, there's much more heterogeneity between systems that are running C than between system running Rust. And that's just the tip of the iceberg, screenshot this and save for 5 or 10 years down the line, you've been warned.
And don't even get me started on the whole premise that you need a hand-holding programming language just because most programmers are garbage tier level nowadays.
Not to say Rust doesn't provide benefits, it's just that the trade-off does not seem worth in the long run. At the end of the day, Rust is just some new circlejerk trying to make a name for themselves and replacing an well established and built language such as C and C++. Of course, the sheep follow suit - to no surprise, as I already mentioned, since the quality of programmers nowadays is deplorable.
This feels much like what Apple does with their products and even their programming languages: "look at me, I'm an Apple Developer!". Sad state of affairs and it'll only get worse.
>there's much more heterogeneity between systems that are running C than between system running Rust
This is true in theory but not in practice. 99% of relevant Linux targets are running glibc and systemd. Not to mention the kernel itself has lots of exploitable surface, especially newer stuff like user namespaces and io_uring, which end up becoming mandatory to use with most modern software.
>And don't even get me started on the whole premise that you need a hand-holding programming language just because most programmers are garbage tier level nowadays.
Disregarding whether programmers nowadays are better or worse than in the past (even though C tooling is objectively the best it's ever been), the reality is that nobody has ever managed to create a non-trivial C system without memory corruption bugs, not even the OpenBSD people, not even Google investing billions in fuzzing and tooling improvements of all kinds.
Whatever trade-off there is, it's more than worth it IMO.
>the reality is that nobody has ever managed to create a non-trivial C system without memory corruption bugs, not even the OpenBSD people,
Hopefully you're not implying Rust will be bug free. Bugs will always exist. We all know this. What we can control is the nature of those bugs; how severe they might possibly be and, most importantly, *who* and *how* it can be fixed.
If you leave all of your security at the language/compiler level, fair game, but that will have a price. If I frick my own program with C, I know I can just go down to the bottom of it myself and fix it. I fricked it up and I'll fix it. That's the bottom line.
You can advocate Rust over C for safety/security, but I can guarantee you could have C modified to your needs in that regard (and it already can to some degree). Even making a variant of it.
This Rust thing just reeks of narcissistic homosexuals trying to inflate their ego at the end of the day. They could have built around the shoulders of giants but instead are trying to create their own little cult. And in the current Zeitgest that's certainly not by accident.
>Hopefully you're not implying Rust will be bug free. Bugs will always exist. We all know this.
Yes, but memory safety bugs are like 70% of all security vulns and like 90% of the most severe ones. Getting rid of that, and gaining additional benefits like safe concurrency and more seems more than worth it to me.
Could they also modify C or could the people behind Rust not be pompous homosexuals? Probably, but to be honest I don't care. And yeah, Rust has disadvantages too, if we get an even better systems language in the future I will advocate for it instead.
>Yes, but memory safety bugs are like 70% of all security vulns and like 90% of the most severe ones.
You do realize you can have memory safety in C and C++ too, right?
>Probably, but to be honest I don't care.
You don't care that they chose a path not for efficiency but through pure narcissism? You have a cuckhold mindset and part of the reason IT is the shitshow it is nowadays. No wonder you're such a strong advocate for Rust, you sound exactly like the kind of zealot that falls for the current IT fad, hook and sink. Have a good one.
>you want memory safety? just don't make things that are memory unsafe
wow genius
Since that one moron though "memory safety" meant "code better", I won't be spoon-feeding. Look at C++ standard library. There are memory safe constructs in there.
Can you name a memory safe C++ project?
I know that memory safe C++ code can in theory exist. The memory safety issues people typically find are caused by human error that can be fixed at the source code level.
But are there projects where people don't make these mistakes?
>But are there projects where people don't make these mistakes?
You know full well what you're asking for and already have a ready-to-go answer on the tip of your tongue which I already know what it'll be and I really don't feel like entertaining a disingenuous homosexual. Go frick yourself.
It's true that I've had this kind of conversation before but I honestly don't know what answer you would have given and what response you expect from me
(me)
Like, if I wanted to be a shithead I'd just say "concession accepted" or something but I actually am interested in your view
hey, linus. you dropped your Atheist card.
>You do realize you can have memory safety in C and C++ too, right?
Has anyone pulled this off?
>If you leave all of your security at the language/compiler level, fair game, but that will have a price. If I frick my own program with C, I know I can just go down to the bottom of it myself and fix it. I fricked it up and I'll fix it. That's the bottom line.
What do you think stops you from doing this in Rust? Do you think Rust has this quality more than C++ does?
The safety features themselves are very transparent. The borrow checker validates your code but doesn't affect the semantics. Same with the data race protection. Bounds checks do take place at runtime but they're straightforward assertions that are still just pointing out your own mistakes for you to fix. You have to do the work yourself.
Other abstractions could be an issue but those are not so fundamentally different from C++'s abstractions and I don't think C++ has this sort of track record
There isn't much point. Maybe in five years the Rust rewrite of sudo will catch on, and maybe in fifteen years there'll be a systemd successor written in Rust, and so on, but making literally everything Rust is more of a meme than something people are particularly interested in creating or using. There wouldn't even be that much synergy since Rust makes a lot of concessions to interoperate smoothly with the C world.
>The difference is that it'll be at the language/compiler level, which means when an exploit is found it'll likely be easily reproducible across all systems.
Do you have examples of these for other languages or compilers?
>That isn't the case for C since, being a more malleable language, there's much more heterogeneity between systems that are running C than between system running Rust.
Just targeting one common C compiler is enough to cause catastrophic damage. One of those is clang, by the way, which uses the exact same LLVM backend as Rust.
>And don't even get me started on the whole premise that you need a hand-holding programming language just because most programmers are garbage tier level nowadays.
This is a IQfy meme. In fact, Rust's complexity and learning curve are common complaints. If you can't figure out manual memory management even trivially, you probably won't even get a Rust program to compile at all without unsafe.
Give it a rest, Barney. It's time to retire.
>Imagine a Rust OS running a Rust browser
Yeah, that's about all you can do
lolamo anon.
a browser is literally the last place rust would be used. maybe after a aaa game.
Rust is bloat and needs to die.
your mom is bloat homosexual.
Yeah, she is, just like Rust.
will it beat GNOME though? that's all I care about now. I assume KDE is ngmi.
GNOME got where it is by fiat. It won't be dethroned except by wholesale replacement of its software ecosystem.
>wholesale replacement of its software ecosystem
One can dream.
I like gnome on Ubuntu. Just need two extensions: steal my focus and names in activities.
Maybe I'm missing something, but it literally looks like an uglier version of Gnome. What is even the point?
It's a clean-slate DE written in Rust with lots of built-in customization. GNOME is a C + JavaScript abomination with decades of technical debt that needs third-party add-ons (that they break often) for basic functionality.
I want someone to write linux using rust and call it rustix and make a distro called RustixOS and make all-compatible environment with wayland compositors coming in a single package with all its dependencies. And when you type 'install xorg' in the terminal it just laughs at you.
Cosmic will work on Redox OS, so you will have an all-rust OS
Why do people write code with bugs in?
Like, your IDE literally puts symbols in your work for you as you type so you don't forget them. Are codemonkeys actually stupid?