Hacker News Reader

I know some embedded/kernel devs and they don't take Rust very seriously. I don't think it has a lot of mindshare in industry among the kind of people who currently write C.

Even if all new code was written in safe languages we would still need to do fuzzing until all legacy code was rewritten -- operating systems, SSL libraries, browsers, load balancers, etc.

View on HN

I know lots of embedded/kernel devs (I am one) and lots of them are at least interested in Rust. It does have mindshare.

I truly believe that's the only reason people aren't using Rust as a replacement for C / C++ immediately. The adoption isn't widespread, but I'm rather optimistic it will be.

It's getting there.

I don't think it's the only reason.

My C programmer friends like the dangerous features of the language and want to use them. Their programs are designed around the assumption that they can mutate anything in memory whenever they want to. They use mutable global variables. They would strongly dislike Rust's memory protections and ownership concept, and its other safety features.

To what purpose? It sounds like they are being reckless just for the heck of it, because that's how the big boys do it and they can't be bothered to learn a new skill.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com