Hacker News Reader

A practical problem is that in order to gain the benefit of linking Rust and C code, one has to give up Rust's wonderful guarantees at the interface. So until islands of Rust meet up, these interact through a C ABI, and have to expose C-like behavior.

View on HN

But you still get those guarantees and benefits in the Rust implementation itself, even if not at the interface (to non-Rust code). By a similar argument, a standalone Rust program "gives up" its guarantees whenever the process makes a call to libc or to the operating system (syscalls), but this isn't really a practical problem.

Sure, I agree. The point is that if the total corpus of Rust code is too isolated into too small islands, then the boundary effects of each island may eat up a lot of the benefit.

I still think the project is really cool and worthwhile.

The world really needs _two_ projects, a practical one that is interoperable with the here and now, to get incremental improvements in security from bits reimplemented in Rust.

And then, in the longer term, someone ought to write a book about operating system implementation in Rust that ignores Linux interoperability and focuses on readability, maintainability by showing use of Rust's idiomatic style.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com