From nobody Mon Sep 09 14:30:43 2024 X-Original-To: freebsd-hackers@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4X2TlS0P0Wz5WXTG for ; Mon, 09 Sep 2024 14:30:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jan@digitaldaemon.com) Received: from digitaldaemon.com (digitaldaemon.com [162.217.114.50]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4X2TlR6J8cz4Y9L for ; Mon, 9 Sep 2024 14:30:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jan@digitaldaemon.com) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none Received: (qmail 51484 invoked by uid 89); 9 Sep 2024 14:30:43 -0000 Received: from c-69-142-153-99.hsd1.nj.comcast.net (HELO ?10.0.0.22?) (jan@digitaldaemon.com@69.142.153.99) by digitaldaemon.com with SMTP; 9 Sep 2024 14:30:43 -0000 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------aCOccR0g6VOIvU1WcRG7zgMG" Message-ID: <256401bf-1b46-467a-a44e-42fc14d20ebf@digitaldaemon.com> Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2024 10:30:43 -0400 List-Id: Technical discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-hackers List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: The Case for Rust (in any system) To: David Chisnall , Poul-Henning Kamp Cc: ske-89@pkmab.se, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org References: <202409091304.aa20239@berenice.pkmab.se> <202409091124.489BOWk2082765@critter.freebsd.dk> <202409091332.489DWNmO084207@critter.freebsd.dk> Content-Language: en-US From: Jan Knepper In-Reply-To: X-Spamd-Bar: ---- X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:36236, ipnet:162.217.112.0/22, country:US] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4X2TlR6J8cz4Y9L This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------aCOccR0g6VOIvU1WcRG7zgMG Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 9/9/24 10:05, David Chisnall wrote: > On 9 Sep 2024, at 14:32, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: >> >> David Chisnall writes: >> >>> On 9 Sep 2024, at 12:24, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: >>>> >>>>> What might that subset be? >>>> >>>> Initially it will be "better C compiler", but then we will gradually >>>> allow more and more of C++ to be used. >>> >>> In my experience, the worst C++ code is written by people thinking in C. >>> The second worst is written by people thinking in Java (or Smalltalk). >> >> I dont disagree :-) >> >> But it's either a gradual approach or "never" because a rewrite in >> toto wont happen. > > I agree, incremental change is always better.  I just don’t want to > encourage anyone to write C++ that looks like C, because that’s going > to combine the frustrations people have with C and C++.  A gradual > approach needs a simple step 1, but it also needs a step 2, and then a > step 3, and so on. > Second. --------------aCOccR0g6VOIvU1WcRG7zgMG Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 9/9/24 10:05, David Chisnall wrote:
On 9 Sep 2024, at 14:32, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> wrote:

David Chisnall writes:

On 9 Sep 2024, at 12:24, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> wrote:

What might that subset be?

Initially it will be "better C compiler", but then we will gradually
allow more and more of C++ to be used.

In my experience, the worst C++ code is written by people thinking in C. 
The second worst is written by people thinking in Java (or Smalltalk).

I dont disagree :-)

But it's either a gradual approach or "never" because a rewrite in toto wont happen.

I agree, incremental change is always better.  I just don’t want to encourage anyone to write C++ that looks like C, because that’s going to combine the frustrations people have with C and C++.  A gradual approach needs a simple step 1, but it also needs a step 2, and then a step 3, and so on.  

Second.

--------------aCOccR0g6VOIvU1WcRG7zgMG--