Programming

17374 readers

251 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Follow the programming.dev instance rules
Keep content related to programming in some way
If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

snowe@programming.dev

Ategon@programming.dev

MaungaHikoi@lemmy.nz

186

Google says replacing C/C++ in firmware with Rust is easy (www.theregister.com)

submitted 2 months ago by lemmee_in@lemm.ee to c/programming@programming.dev

95 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Google recently rewrote the firmware for protected virtual machines in its Android Virtualization Framework using the Rust programming language and wants you to do the same, assuming you deal with firmware.

In a write-up on Thursday, Android engineers Ivan Lozano and Dominik Maier dig into the technical details of replacing legacy C and C++ code with Rust.

"You'll see how easy it is to boost security with drop-in Rust replacements, and we'll even demonstrate how the Rust toolchain can handle specialized bare-metal targets," said Lozano and Maier.

Easy is not a term commonly heard with regard to a programming language known for its steep learning curve.

Nor is it easy to get C and C++ developers to see the world with Rust-tinted lenses. Just last week, one of the maintainers of the Rust for Linux project - created to work Rust code into the C-based Linux kernel - stepped down, citing resistance from Linux kernel developers.

"Here's the thing, you're not going to force all of us to learn Rust," said a Linux kernel contributor during a lively discussion earlier this year at a conference.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] GetOffMyLan@programming.dev 69 points 2 months ago (54 children)

Here's the thing, you're not going to force all of us to learn Rust

That seems like a poor attitude imo.

[+] onlinepersona@programming.dev -9 points 2 months ago (1 children)

If the linux kernel had any real budget to speak of, they could hire rust experts to maintain the rust code. But the "linux" foundation spends 2% of its budget on Linux, this is the situation you end up with.

Anti Commercial-AI license

[–] mke@lemmy.world 21 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I believe that's incorrect. The reporter who started this rumor either misunderstood the meaning of the chart or was lying through his teeth. I'll find the original source and share it here later.

Linux Foundation Report.

This is the actual source. If you simply scroll through it, you'll see they're investing in many things that move the Linux ecosystem forward. Open standards, open hardware, security in the software stack, providing for latest market needs, keeping an eye on legislation that could affect Linux, staying in touch with important entities in the industry, and so on.

Scroll down near the bottom and you'll find where the reporter got their information from. It's an expenditure chart and, sure enough, it says "Linux Kernel Support 2%" Note, however, that it also says:

Community Tooling 5%
Training and Certifications 7%
Project Infrastructure 9%
Project Support 64% (!)

Note that it doesn't say how any of them is further divided. Remember all the things I mentioned earlier? All of that is value for Linux as a whole.

Software projects aren't just about programming the big thing. Working on a large project will show you this. Could the foundation spend more on Linux? Maybe. But saying they only spend 2% on it is disingenuous.

The reporter doesn't mention this in his clickbait piece, either because he doesn't get it in the first place, or more likely because he just wants to push his views.

This is yet another example why Lunduke isn't a credible source of news.

load more comments (52 replies)