News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Linux kernel in-tree Rust support by cxr on Monday July 13, 2020 @12:49AM (#23817280)
You're not seeking answers; in place of anything that would lead to a better understanding, you're asking the questions that make it easier to defend the position you've staked out. (Great job, Brendan!)

If someone released a memory-safe, highly concurrent, systems-oriented version of INTERCAL, you recognize that someone might look at that and say, "Gee, I don't think that's really worth using", and the comment's lack of detail doesn't nullify the substance of what makes the comment true or not? And an opponent could approach in the same way you are now, with the primary goal of "beating" the other participant—by making it burdensome to respond—and by all appearances do so?

It's not my job to painstakingly prepare a perfect, incontrovertible response for a hostile adversary, particularly since absolutely nothing would come of that time investment. If your idea of success is the sound of all your colleagues telling yourselves that you won the conversation and you're on the right track and nothing needs to change because there really aren't any issues... then, hey, that's just fine.

Re:Linux kernel in-tree Rust support by roca on Monday July 13, 2020 @05:52AM (#23818997)
You asserted that Rust should be thrown away, but decline to provide any reasons why you think that. So yeah, in the absence of any supporting argument, I reject your claim, and so would any other reasonable person who doesn't already believe it. You have added nothing to the discussion.
Re:Linux kernel in-tree Rust support by cxr on Monday July 13, 2020 @11:21AM (#23821703)
> You asserted that Rust should be thrown away, but decline to provide any reasons why you think that.

That simply isn't true.

> I reject your claim

That's fine.