All the time wasted on navel-gazing could have been spent auditing and fixing the original projects' code.

Starting anew WILL introduce new bugs. This is a statistical certainty.

Most Rust rewrites solve no new problems, just imaginary boogeymen.

One would never return “*” to signal an error in rust code (or any language with an option type).

Rust can't even self-host on most of the architectures that abortion of a library was written for.

Holy fuck are Rust people all petty activists?

Stop spending every waking minute telling everyone how great it is and making knockoff clones of 40 year old software and go solve new problems.

Nothing precludes error handling in C. It's on the programmers to actually do it.

Nothing precludes having legible programs in Brainfuck[1]. It's on programmers to actually do it.

[1] Other than the language itself.

Same goes for C, it's reliance on weakish type system is what causes its numerous fuckups.

If you forget to do it in C, everything still looks superficially right.

If you forget to do it in rust (or zig, or typescript, or any of the hundreds of languages with option types), your code doesn't compile.

Nothing precludes "simply do not fall off" when working off heights, either, but there's a reason safety harnesses are mandatory when working at heights in most of the developed world.

Imagine every Rust program just calling unwrap on this result, and therefore the Rust library deciding to just never return an error. That’s analogous to what happened here.

I can’t stress this enough: there are—rightfully—a whole bunch of people that simply do not want to work on C codebases, because in the typical case, working wIth C sucks. Your outbursts are never going to change this, no matter how petulant or vitriolic. Amazing how a group of people has made “[aversion to{ languages with far fewer footguns” into some sort of culture war issue. Sorry that the industry is forcing you to read a book or whatever.

If your goal is to convince people that you're right, describing things as "time wasted on navel-gazing" is not the type of thing that will win people over. It comes across as arrogant and entitled, as if the world would be better if everyone would just recognize you're smarter and therefore should do whatever you want.

If you're just pissed and trying to blow off steam, maybe this choice of words will help a bit, but because of the issues described above, it also might just cause a bunch of people to react negatively towards you and therefore make your mood worse.

If you're just commenting here as something to reference in the future for when you expect to say "I told you so!" to everyone, I guess this is a reasonable way of doing it. It still doesn't really seem like there's much need for phrasing it like that though; people still might look back and think that you're right but still sound arrogant and entitled.

Thanks, Dad.

I'm sorry that my suggestion that people comment on this forum in more constructive ways bothers you

He's your dad? You have a pretty cool dad.

Friendly relationship or not, the end user experience is that something that was working, no longer is, because it's not feature compatible. This is despite it being used to replace it under the same name. If it had been `runas` or anything else it'd be fine.

There's a strong principle in upstream Linux kernel about "You don't break userspace"[1], that I really wish more folks would get into their heads, but most especially a variant "You don't subtly break userspace".

If you're going to replace an existing binary, under the same name, you need to be like-for-like in commands, even if your guts are completely different. Very few people give a damn about how it's actually implemented, just does it do what they need it to do.

If you want to do things differently, do it under a different name and have it be an explicit break for an end user by not shipping with the original and let people choose to install it if they really don't want the new thing. Breaking things subtly is completely unacceptable.

[1] espoused really clearly, as part of an infamous rant https://lore.kernel.org/all/CA+55aFy98A+LJK4+GWMcbzaa1zsPBRo...

Yeah "You don't break userspace" refers to the kernel <-> userspace interface (libc) because that's the smallest common denominator and the reason why stuff like snap works.

Besides that userspace has been incompatible between distros for at least 30 years because everyone has that one special patch the library needs on their distro that isn't accepted upstream and breaks things beyond repair.

This was already the case in the 1990s when Applixware shipped 30 different versions of their software on one CD-Rom because it should run on different distros and their versions.

And back then there weren't that many, mostly Red Hat, SuSE and Debian.