Dude what are you on about, there is no rust programmer that want to teach fucking rust to anyone who doesn't want learn...
This has nothing to do with C vs Rust, this has to do with security and enabling more people to develop stuff for Linux.
These so called kernel maintainers you see in the conference are only mainting the parts that they use for their filesystem, they are mainting the API, they are paid by companies who have sold support for ext4, xfs or brtfs etc.. . Of course they don't want to make their jobs any harder by learning a new language.
And of course they obfuscate the API with random naming and undocumented usage, because they want to make it hard for anyone else using trying to use the APIs.
If they don't want to be part of the improvement, then go do something else. Yes rust is better than C for this, because guess what - there are still CVEs being made, because it's impossible to catch everything with you eyes.
That was what he was talking about at the conference, he literally asked for help about how things work, so he could write better APIs that they are more comfortable using.
What does this even have to do with rust developers,
The language rust gives us the ability to have more compile time checks, and why is that a bad thing. Do you like security issues in your OS because some dev forgot to handle pointers correctly?
There's no solution, they need not only to accept that rust is going to be part of the kernel but also that it's a good thing. Otherwise how do you cooperate efficiently.
And also if they are so big brained, should be easy to learn rust then, I mean I'm pretty small brained and I know rust.
Yes and the big heads in this case don't want to share that knowledge, because why? Because they are treating the kernel like their pet project that they own and control, and they don't wanna lose that control, rather looking at the bigger picture.
It's kinda obvious that rust is the way forward as google has clearly shown, so why are they gatekeeping?
People are dumb as hell, it's fucking open source, go maintain the c fork, and let the those who want to improve the fucking shit cve producing codebase make a rust fork. And see which one people will use, and we all know that the rust fork will have wider adoption, it's a no brainer.
No one is forcing them to maintain the Linux kernel, no one is telling them to stop writing patches, they can't because you can download the code and work on it as you like.
It's people who know they will be irrelevant because they spent decades producing shit software, and they can't even be bothered to learn a new language to improve stability and security for the whole fucking userbase. Give me a break, what a bunch of whiners.
Yes we are going to enable this feature that is going to be irrelevant in the future, because where building an API in the browser to fetch browser History...
Dude what are you on about, there is no rust programmer that want to teach fucking rust to anyone who doesn't want learn...
This has nothing to do with C vs Rust, this has to do with security and enabling more people to develop stuff for Linux.
These so called kernel maintainers you see in the conference are only mainting the parts that they use for their filesystem, they are mainting the API, they are paid by companies who have sold support for ext4, xfs or brtfs etc.. . Of course they don't want to make their jobs any harder by learning a new language.
And of course they obfuscate the API with random naming and undocumented usage, because they want to make it hard for anyone else using trying to use the APIs.
If they don't want to be part of the improvement, then go do something else. Yes rust is better than C for this, because guess what - there are still CVEs being made, because it's impossible to catch everything with you eyes.