DEV Community

Discussion on: C - Unsafe!

Collapse
 
pauljlucas profile image
Paul J. Lucas

Your C code should be using const for all char*, e.g., char const*.

That aside, the faults of C have been known for quite a long time.

i still don't think it's a good idea to rewrite even parts of the operating systems in Rust.

Because?

Collapse
 
ernestvonmoscow profile image
VanPonasenkov

Because?

1st, Rust's assembly output is a bit more complicated than that of C (Or C++, Even with things like classes and generics), not a problem when dealing with a game engine, or a web server, but pretty important when writing an operating system (Or when writing on an embedded system). with that said, i'm not saying Rust is slow, it's surprisingly fast, what i'm saying is Rust's assembly is harder to debug than that of C or C++

2nd, this part is a bit biased but hear me out, i don't think we NEED TO rewrite even parts of the current operating systems in Rust (For example drivers). The reason for that is very simple,- C provides the bare minimum for writing that sort of stuff, and i don't think we need anything more.

In spite of this, i still like Rust. I'm looking forward to new operating systems being written in Rust, but i oppose the idea of rewriting the current ones

Collapse
 
pauljlucas profile image
Paul J. Lucas

Rust's assembly output is a bit more complicated than that of C....

That could simply be due to an immature compiler. gcc way back in the 3.0 days was pretty poor too.

Rewriting anything just for the sake of rewriting it is generally a bad idea. There's simply no reason to replace debugged, stable code.

Thread Thread
 
ernestvonmoscow profile image
VanPonasenkov

agreed