that a better use of effort would be to re-implement Rust OS
drivers in C than to implement Rust environmental support for smaller
leaf functions. A C re-implementation would be a welcomed by all, would
not add any OS build complexity or design complexity, and would only
require one toolchain
void the
>> > > complexity and maintenance issues of a mixed language solution (as
>> > > enumerated by others in this thread).
>> >
>> > I can see Lup is already on the GH thread this is good news :-) I
>> > would suggest to limit Rust for the Applica
ng display sound etc to show others how to port Rust applications
> > to NuttX :-)
> >
> >
> > Below are my concerns in depth for our internal discussion.. maybe you
> > have similar thoughts.. and you can safely ignore that part :-)
> >
> > There are some Rust based OS a
OSIX RTOS architecture.. then create several demos
> using display sound etc to show others how to port Rust applications
> to NuttX :-)
>
>
> Below are my concerns in depth for our internal discussion.. maybe you
> have similar thoughts.. and you can safely ignore that par
-1 from me for Rust in the kernel, +1 for Rust in apps.
Pierre-Noël Bouteville
Envoyé de mon iPhone
> Le 14 mars 2024 à 09:51, raiden00pl a écrit :
>
> -1 from me for Rust in the kernel, +1 for Rust in apps.
gh.
If you don't know what you are doing, Rust is dangerous too.
On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 7:29 PM Gregory Nutt wrote:
> There is some discussion in Issue #11907 proposing to use the Rust
> language within the OS (vs Rust applications on a pure C OS). If anyone
> has any feelings, Pro
t;
> Below are my concerns in depth for our internal discussion.. maybe you
> have similar thoughts.. and you can safely ignore that part :-)
>
> There are some Rust based OS already out there. Look how many! Some of
> them does not even plan to support security mitigations, sensor
> d
al demos
using display sound etc to show others how to port Rust applications
to NuttX :-)
Below are my concerns in depth for our internal discussion.. maybe you
have similar thoughts.. and you can safely ignore that part :-)
There are some Rust based OS already out there. Look how many! Some of
them
No one said "full community support" or "unanimity". That would be
nice. There are Apache rules for determining technical direction that
defines "community support":
https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html under "Code
Modifications". This prohibits any small group from commandeering
I think we will never have "full community support" because it means
something like "unanimity" and as a guy called Nelson Rodrigues once said:
"All unanimity is dumb".
Although (fortunately) we don't have full community support, it seems we
have a direction: only application support for now.
On 3/13/2024 4:11 PM, Alan C. Assis wrote:
I think we are having a CMakefile deja-vu here, don't we? (I hope we don't
lose any developer this time)
Let's make sure that we have full concurrence from the community. Our
responsibility is to serve the whole community and not just the special
I think we are having a CMakefile deja-vu here, don't we? (I hope we don't
lose any developer this time)
The goal of improving Rust on NuttX is to get better support for our
current "integration" (that is not implemented the right way, actually it
is just a wrapper currently, we had a
On 3/13/2024 2:42 PM, Tomek CEDRO wrote:
You want Rust in the core go ahead write RustOS have fun maintaining it for 5
years and show us its better :-)
You are probably right in that. It would probably be necessary have to
be a different OS if any extensive amount of Rust is used. POSIX
://www.tomek.cedro.info
On Wed, Mar 13, 2024, 19:29 Gregory Nutt wrote:
> There is some discussion in Issue #11907 proposing to use the Rust
> language within the OS (vs Rust applications on a pure C OS). If anyone
> has any feelings, Pro or Con, you should participate in this
> discussion
rnet. There is more than buzz. There is an ongoing effort to use Rust
in (isolated parts of) the Linux kernel, as well as the Windows OS. These
things are important because when it comes to choosing a language that
needs to be supported long term, widespread adoption is arguably the most
important fac
I have mixed feelings too regarding Rust in the core OS. Having Rust
aplications is in my oppinion the way to see how community feels about Rust.
There is another aspect of having Rust in Nuttx. Who will maintain it after
merge?
Best regards
Alin
On Wed, 13 Mar 2024, 20:51 Nathan Hartman
There is an ongoing effort to use Rust
in (isolated parts of) the Linux kernel, as well as the Windows OS. These
things are important because when it comes to choosing a language that
needs to be supported long term, widespread adoption is arguably the most
important factor.
The advantages of using
There is some discussion in Issue #11907 proposing to use the Rust
language within the OS (vs Rust applications on a pure C OS). If anyone
has any feelings, Pro or Con, you should participate in this
discussion. This kind of decision impacts the entire community and
should have the input
18 matches
Mail list logo
