Matthew Wilcox <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I really want this to happen. It's taken 50 years, but we finally have > a programming language that can replace C for writing kernels. I really don't want this to happen. Whilst I have sympathy with the idea that C can be replaced with something better - Rust isn't it. The syntax is awful. It's like they looked at perl and thought they could beat it at inventing weird and obfuscated bits of operator syntax. Can't they replace the syntax with something a lot more C-like[*]? But quite apart from that, mass-converting the kernel to Rust is pretty much inevitably going introduce a whole bunch of new bugs. David [*] That said, we do rather torture the C-preprocessor more than we should have to if the C language was more flexible. Some of that could be alleviated by moving to C++ and using some of the extra features available there. That would be an easier path than rusting the kernel.
