zlacker

>>rvz+(OP)
Classic Linus.

From the closing paragraph, I feel like he’s under the impression that Rust-advocating contributors are putting Rust’s interests (e.g. “legitimizing it” by getting it in the kernel) above the kernel itself.

>>kweing+O7
They probably are, in many cases. Rust’s community, in aggregate, have developed a reputation (earned, in my opinion). It’s too bad that the community don’t follow the leaders’ example in this regard. There are some quality, level-headed Rust advocates. They appear to be the minority.

>>sidlls+2a
At least they don't go around slandering programming language communities.

If we're going to be serious about who is being toxic, it's definitely Linus in this thread. Guy makes first mistake (by a very broad interpretation of "mistake". Perhaps "misunderstanding"?). Linus goes nuclear. And while his reasoning is sound, his argumentation cycles between threats, bad-faith arguments, and just plain old yelling.

What some people don't understand is that the Linux kernel isn't 'led' in any meaningful sense. But I suppose some projects don't need actual leadership? I once was recommended a Metallica documentary, because "It's amusing to see what emotionally stunted 40-50 year olds who have never had anyone tell them 'No' since 18 will do." That's the Linus vibe -- somehow we've limped along to here. Seriously, read the rust/rust-lang issues/RFCs. Those people sound like grownups contrasted to this.

>>mustac+1e
Guy makes mistake and even after that continues discussion though he already heard the agreed argument?

I'm not understanding that if Linuxrusters want to do more their own thing and get rid of those rules and discussions they just fork off a real Linuxrustkernel and go off?

The "political correct" toxicity comes from that group which continously wants to undermine long beforehand agreeds frontiers... (e.g. again this panic-is-more-safe discussion).

>>throw8+sh
> The "political correct" toxicity comes from that group which continously wants to undermine long beforehand agreeds frontiers

I have no idea what this actually refers to? "Panic is more safe"? Rust doesn't choose to panic on a failed memory allocation in the kernel, and never intended to. It was always TODO until it was implemented? Linus is using a userspace panic as an example here?

As to this thread's particular issue, the API for an allocation wasn't settled, and this is the discussion. I think the contributor was completely within his remit to say, "Heck, we could do this is a more memory safe way..." And Linus was completely right to say "Yeah, that's not how we do allocations here." The only problem is thinking being a dick is a good way to lead a community.

I think some fantasize about being able to be a dick in a FOSS project just like Linus (which feels like "if only I was a strong man dictator"), and I think that's an absurd desire. The Linux kernel is sui generis. In no other area of the world can anyone act this way, and be productive.