There is some discussion in Issue #11907 proposing to use the Rust
language within the OS (vs Rust applications on a pure C OS). If anyone
has any feelings, Pro or Con, you should participate in this
discussion. This kind of decision impacts the entire community and
should have the input of
tl;dr: I am in wait-and-see mode regarding Rust.
The long story:
I have been watching the programming language landscape for some time to
see if there is a viable successor to C/C++.
C has many advantages:
* Standardized (ISO and ANSI standards) since more than 30 years ago, which
makes the lan
I have mixed feelings too regarding Rust in the core OS. Having Rust
aplications is in my oppinion the way to see how community feels about Rust.
There is another aspect of having Rust in Nuttx. Who will maintain it after
merge?
Best regards
Alin
On Wed, 13 Mar 2024, 20:51 Nathan Hartman, wrote
Hi,
My position is : not in the core OS.
Why is everyone not surprised about that lol
I have actual Reasons for this, not just my bad mood or resistance to
novelty:
-only one toolchain, no alternative
-this excludes anything not supported by vanilla clang, eg
ARM/intel/riscv (I think). ez
I am against Rust in NuttX core for the same reasons against Rust in
FreeBSD core. These systems are minimalistic Unix, self sufficient, and
maintainable. Lets keep things that way.
We had long discussion about that recently on the BSD mailing list:
https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-hack
On 3/13/2024 2:42 PM, Tomek CEDRO wrote:
You want Rust in the core go ahead write RustOS have fun maintaining it for 5
years and show us its better :-)
You are probably right in that. It would probably be necessary have to
be a different OS if any extensive amount of Rust is used. POSIX
d
I think we are having a CMakefile deja-vu here, don't we? (I hope we don't
lose any developer this time)
The goal of improving Rust on NuttX is to get better support for our
current "integration" (that is not implemented the right way, actually it
is just a wrapper currently, we had a presentation
On 3/13/2024 4:11 PM, Alan C. Assis wrote:
I think we are having a CMakefile deja-vu here, don't we? (I hope we don't
lose any developer this time)
Let's make sure that we have full concurrence from the community. Our
responsibility is to serve the whole community and not just the special
I think we will never have "full community support" because it means
something like "unanimity" and as a guy called Nelson Rodrigues once said:
"All unanimity is dumb".
Although (fortunately) we don't have full community support, it seems we
have a direction: only application support for now.
Bes
No one said "full community support" or "unanimity". That would be
nice. There are Apache rules for determining technical direction that
defines "community support":
https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html under "Code
Modifications". This prohibits any small group from commandeering th
On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 10:03 PM Gregory Nutt wrote:
> On 3/13/2024 2:42 PM, Tomek CEDRO wrote:
> > You want Rust in the core go ahead write RustOS have fun maintaining it for
> > 5 years and show us its better :-)
>
> You are probably right in that. It would probably be necessary have to
> be a
11 matches
Mail list logo
