Re:Haskell's Children
by dimitrios1 on Wednesday September 23, 2020 @03:05PM
(#24570682)
> Rust is still a moving target with a single implementation, and no (present) way to get the guarantees needed for the embedded domains I've been involved in.
Absolutely. I've said it before, I will say it again, Rust will not be taken seriously as a systems language until it is specified. As I understand it years ago I was laughed at for this, but it is underway. I am grateful for this.
I forgot to preface my statements with I Love Rust, or, moreso, I actually love OCaml, and I love OCaml inspired languages, and I would love to write an OS in it (save ReactOS).
That being said, the desire to label it as the "premier systems language" (and no fault of the author, many before have tried to say this) is entirely not grounded in any sort of reality.
Re:Haskell's Children
by steveklabnik on Wednesday September 23, 2020 @02:25PM
(#24570227)
Fun story: here's a recent talk by someone at Green Hills, talking about experiences giving Rust a try https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5A7rSPYpb8
I can go to Green Hills and get a contract that guarantees their compiler will be available and supported for my target platform for the next 10+ years. Rust is still a moving target with a single implementation, and no (present) way to get the guarantees needed for the embedded domains I've been involved in. I'd like to see Rust experimented with there, but it won't be the "go to" language for quite some time.