RustSupremacist

One of the banned individuals was indeed not serious: https://xcancel.com/Malix_Labs/status/2079172393105227839

I am guilty in the Rust community of being too obsessed with Zig. I don't know why. There are many other languages mentioned in a negative way but for some reason, mentioning Rust makes people very sensitive. Meanwhile, we have no problem disparaging other languages to support Rust. For those of us who have Rust and are happy with Rust, why do we need to concern ourselves with another language and their issue tracker? This happened when it was announced that TypeScript was being rewritten in Go too. I want the Rust community to be better even if it means not interacting with other programming languages. There is nothing to gain acting like bullies and thugs.

This reminds me that the Rust Foundation is a 501(c)(6) and not a 501(c)(3) like the Zig Software Foundation. To me, the Rust Foundation would do better for the community if they were a 501(c)(3) and more transparent about finances.

501(c)(3) organizations are non-profits that include charities, whereas 501(c)(6) organizations are non-profits with less strict requirements. Both are tax-exempt federally, but 501(c)(3) organizations have higher financial transparency requirements and higher restrictions on political activity (which qualifies donations to 501(c)s as tax-deductible).

The Rust Foundation is a 501(c)(6) and not a 501(c)(3). The Rust Foundation would do better for the community if they were a 501(c)(3) and more transparent about finances. The Rust Foundation should change their governance structure to a 501(c)(3) instead of a 501(c)(6).

Donations to the Zig Software Foundation largely go to contributors to the language. Meanwhile, donations to the Rust Foundation largely go into pockets unknown.

The key difference is that the Rust Foundation is a 501(c)(6) and not a 501(c)(3). The Rust Foundation would do better for the community if they were a 501(c)(3) and more transparent about finances. Follow this example for the greater good.

Rust needs good Qt bindings. None of the existing projects will ever reach Qt. Rust. Cargo. Qt. Go did it with https://github.com/mappu/miqt. Zig did it with https://github.com/rcalixte/libqt6zig. When will Rust do it? The time is now.

There are bindings for Go (https://github.com/mappu/miqt) and Zig (https://github.com/rcalixte/libqt6zig) but not for Rust. We need bindings like these for Rust.

This is not what the people want. Understand that. Give us Rust and Qt. Why be so focused on trying to sell something that doesn't measure up? Even beta Bridges is better than Slint. Take the advice and put the energy to better use for the good of Rust.

We need to go back to when the front page of the site was only Rust posts.

The GUI situation for Rust is dire. We are still not GUI yet! Even if Rust isn't the best for GUI, the opportunity is still there. Qt is the best option. There isn't a second option. Don't let Go and Zig have bindings for Qt without Rust! Only Rust. Only Cargo. No QML. No C++. No markup. No immediate mode. No dead projects.

The most charitable interpretation of this is that the Reddit mods should stick to Reddit. If they had, this wouldn't have reflected so poorly on them.

This attitude is why the project has toxic maintainers from Germany to China: https://xcancel.com/QULuseslignux/status/1918296149724692968

This author is not someone who should be reporting on Rust especially in the kernel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gVC1gp2PS8U&t=1538s

The GUI situation in Rust is dreadful: https://www.boringcactus.com/2025/04/13/2025-survey-of-rust-...

Rust is simply not meant for GUI-based data design but I still want Qt in Rust. That's it. Not QML or Slint or egui or Tauri or gpui or Iced. No markup at all. None of the immediate mode things. No double and triple languages like this C++ mess. Definitely not GTK or the other non-imperative subpar things. There is one option. Until there is more than one, Qt is the best. No one else is worried about this missed opportunity.

What does it say about your latest project that it attracts the most toxic types from Germany to China^? Are you even aware? Do you consider this "building the right group of talent" for your project?

^https://xcancel.com/QULuseslignux/status/1918296149724692968

This highlights the value of having non-profits as a 501(c)(3). The transparency about Hack Club is refreshing.

The Rust Foundation is a 501(c)(6) and not a 501(c)(3). The Rust Foundation would do better for the community if they were a 501(c)(3) and more transparent about finances. Follow this example for the greater good.

This is a total victory for Rust. Zig was making progress before this. Now the project is going to black hole itself in the most tone deaf and spectacular way possible. Not even a mirror? Way to accept total defeat.

People keep asking why TUIs in Rust and the answer is because the GUI situation in Rust is dreadful: https://www.boringcactus.com/2025/04/13/2025-survey-of-rust-...

Rust is simply not meant for GUI-based data design but I still want Qt in Rust. That's it. Not QML or Slint. No markup at all. None of the immediate mode things. No other languages. Definitely not GTK. I'm worried it will never happen for Rust and it will be such a missed opportunity.

The perception of Zig and Rust within different communities can vary, and Zig may not attract the same level of "lukewarm response" as Rust due to several factors, including their design philosophies, target use cases, and community engagement.

Zig's appeal lies in its deliberate simplicity and explicitness, offering a different path to high-performance, low-level programming compared to Rust's safety-first, more complex approach. This divergence in philosophy and implementation leads to different reception within the programming community.

The Rust Foundation is a 501(c)(6) and not a 501(c)(3). The Rust Foundation would do better for the community if they were a 501(c)(3) and more transparent about finances.

There is no need for a new fund, the existing funds should be directed towards development and there should be greater transparency about how funds are gathered and spent.

This post is devoid of details and action. It should read that the Rust Foundation is going to convert to a 501(c)(3) and ensure that current funds are spent on development. Otherwise, this is a shell game with the existing funds and how they are going to be spent. Understand that sleight of hand bodes poorly and suggest impropriety.

Rust is #16 on TIOBE, down from #13.

GitHub also just published Octoverse 2025 and Rust still hasn't cracked the top 10: https://github.blog/news-insights/octoverse/octoverse-a-new-...

Meanwhile, C++ is steadfast and even C is on the edges.

Looking at these lists, Go is an interesting option. It's rising in popularity and there is also a young community interested in it. It also integrates much better with existing C projects. Are there requirements for manual memory management? Would porting to Go instead of Rust have noticeable impacts on performance? Thinking about it now, Go seems like a more prudent option than Rust that achieves all of the publicly stated goals.

GNOME highlights most of the worst possible characteristics open source has, especially their last 15 years. Narcissism, opaque decisions, politics, virtue signaling, 4chan obsession, and toxic behavior describe just the past few months of that project. It's high time to cancel GNOME.

It depends on how you define supply chain attacks.

Recently, there was an exploit discovered in an abandoned Rust package that was used by many other Rust projects, many unaware of it due to the sheer number of dependencies. Whether by negligence or malice, having a known vulnerability that permeates significant portions of the ecosystem is on the order of a supply chain attack.

https://edera.dev/stories/tarmageddon

Worse yet, independent research suggests that the state is arguably much worse: https://00f.net/2025/10/17/state-of-the-rust-ecosystem/

Given projects that make the claim of switching to Rust to access new contributors, it remains to be seen how many of those new contributors are capable of being retained.

Inviting rank amateurs to established projects while expecting them to operate as free labor in the hopes of future relevance for employment has a distinctly different feel. Missives like the OP feel like preying on a desperate and young generation when paired with the commentary.

If all the entry-level jobs are C or C++, do you think companies would have a hard time filling them? Would the unemployed new graduates really shun gainful employment if Rust wasn't part of the equation?

Meanwhile, hiring managers left and right are reporting that within hours of a job being posted, they are flooded with hundreds of applications. And you can't find a single person because of the programming language of your stack? And to remedy this, you're going to rewrite your stack in an unproven language? Have you considered that if you can't find anyone that it might not be a programming language or tech stack problem?

Inviting inexperienced amateurs to wide-reaching projects does not seem to be a prudent recipe. Nay, it is a recipe for disaster.

Focus on a language that isn't a moving target, sir.

And this argument about "young" contributors is the same nonsense that came from your senior management. But you're independent.

Aren't the experienced engineers supposed to be leading the next generation? If you really want to get the young folks on board, drop Ubuntu and call it Gyatt. Instead of LTS, call it Rizz. Just think of all the young who will want to work on Skibidi 26.04!

Rust attracts hype and hype artists. Ask me how I know. Do you want drive-by people or do you want long-term community members? There are many young folk interested in learning C and looking for adequate mentorship along with a project to work on. Wouldn't that be a better use of energy? Have you even put out any outreach to attract others to these projects where you say you're alone?

You are making a mistake and falling on the sword for your bosses at the same time. Tough days are here but maybe hold on for better employment than this.

You have never been skilled at being considerate:

https://github.com/keepassxreboot/keepassxc/issues/10725#iss...

"The best laid plans of mice and men often go awry."

This is the same maintainer who broke KeePass on Debian and then flipped off everyone in the thread. Someone needs to pull him aside and let him know the world does not revolve around him and the problems he chooses to manufacture to justify his paycheck.

https://github.com/keepassxreboot/keepassxc/issues/10725#iss...

Everything about cxx-qt is wrong. The Rust ecosystem deserves better. Not QML. Not any markup-like things like Slint. No immediate mode. And definitely not GTK. So much wasted potential.

> There is a usable port of Linux to Apple hardware now

This has never been true since inception, depending on your definition of usable. Worse yet, the entire project was staffed by people with poor mental health seeking attention for using Rust and validation as "hacker" engineers. Once failure was more than apparent and the fame never materialized, these people will move on to the next attention-seeking and high profile project that they can latch onto with Rust.

Only the M1 and M2 were bootable and even then, not the entirety of hardware. No support for anything after M3 and we're already at M5. And then there's Apple actively antagonizing any and all attempts with hardware changes designed specifically to mitigate these hacks. Apple's latest business model is to weaponize vendor lock-in as a means of extracting the remaining cash left on their platform, assuming they aren't able to sell more devices.

> If there were even tacit support, Apple could sell millions of MacBooks to us.

No power users of Linux want anything to do with Apple. Any that want anything to do with Apple's hardware only want the performance gains and efficiency. Tacit support from a quality manufacturer that would embrace Linux without hostility will capture sales. Most of the Linux enthusiasts want a classic ThinkPad with the performance and battery life of the M5 Max. A nice display and keyboard would be the enterprise offering that could carry that company for the next generation. Apple had their chance.