Re:System programming in Rust: beyond safety
by tom_mellior on Thursday June 15, 2017 @05:32AM
(#14558941)
... a large part of which was just responses to one person who said "OMG, you can't write a kernel in Haskell, it uses malloc", as if (a) Linux didn't have its own kmalloc, and (b) a hypothetical Rust kernel wouldn't use malloc.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:System programming in Rust: beyond safety
by frankmcsherry on Thursday June 15, 2017 @06:39AM
(#14559195)
In the event that anyone isn't clear on the relative quality of discussions across various websites, please click the reddit link and observe someone asking a sincere question and getting specific and helpful responses, with no attempt to score points by misrepresenting the position of the others.
Re:System programming in Rust: beyond safety
by nickpsecurity on Thursday June 15, 2017 @11:25AM
(#14561256)
Inspired by that response, I shared a Haskell OS and Ocaml on PIC microcontrollers.
https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/6h5mht/system_program...
Not a wasted question after all given prior, positive feedback on those projects.
Re:System programming in Rust: beyond safety
by hashhar on Thursday June 15, 2017 @12:16PM
(#14561730)
That is a very good question for someone new to the field and the answer is really well detailed. Honestly, as of right now the discussion there is more enlightening than here.
Re:System programming in Rust: beyond safety
by tom_mellior on Friday June 16, 2017 @02:30AM
(#14567036)
I agree that in a thread about Rust systems programming, asking how Rust (and, come to think of it, Haskell) can do dynamic allocation on the bare metal is a good question. I think the good underlying question was devalued by what I think was the poster's lack of reflection. Obviously Rust can do it because Rust is magical, but Haskell? How would that ever work?
Your interpretation may vary.