Hacker News Reader

Comment by mikymoothrowa | Hacker News Reader

How many other languages have been merged to Linux other than C and Rust? Zero. (Ignore perl scripts, etc)

Did you look at the PR that was merged?

https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/lin...

This is not trivial work. This will only get over better over time (with funding), all for safe and secure Linux for the mass!!

The only thing that concerns me now is the Rust code in kernel is not GPLv2. Not sure if that's intentional.

> The only thing that concerns me now is the Rust code in kernel is not GPLv2. Not sure if that's intentional.

The only code that isn't GPLv2 is the alloc crate. Which is basically a copy of upstream with some changes. All the kernel specific stuff is GPL

They obviously didn't miss this while reviewing the patch, but just wondering: are there any performance/resource implications to making KSYM_NAME_LEN 512 instead of the previous 128 or 256?

Uhh being in the linux kernel is "poor adoption" now, right.

Alternatively one can consider that fast adoption driven by marketing isn't a sign of best quality. Take a look at Java.

Java would be devoured by C# and others if it were that bad. I guess that it isn’t bad, at a pragmatic level. It definitely ain’t about developer joy though. When I first used it in 99 it seemed magical though. Notepad + javac = gui program. Compare that to VisualC++ or VB!

Once something gets entrenched, the tin soldier logic of bean counters will make it stick around for a long time.

It doesn't matter. Java is safe (thanks to it's GC) albeit having null pointer. Very few languages offered that guarantee.

Java is anything but low quality...

Java the language was the worst part of Java the technology stack for years. This has been changing but only very recently.

That's true, I suppose I am lumping the JVM and tooling in there with my defense.

I do like the verboseness, though, espectially for inheriting code.

I wouldn't call it a best quality language design. And its adoption was driven by marketing for sure.

Must have been a bit more than marketing, sinceto Ms had to do first J++ then C# to counter its impact.

or Java Script

Weird example. JS took a long time to take off, and had virtually no marketing budget.

Or is your point that JS took off despite that, and so maybe is high quality? I think that's wrong too.

JS name was based on Java. Pure marketing name.

Launched by Netscape with Sun approval (they used to own the trademark, now it is Oracle) in 95.

Netscape had money and marketshare.

It was adopted by competing browsers (IE in 96, Opera end of 97) and removed alternatives (perl, tcl, python in browsers (eg https://www.foo.be/docs/tpj/issues/vol2_3/tpj0203-0004.html ))

As for the quality of JS, there was a reason "JS the good parts" was popular.

JS was a quickly made (in 10 days). It showed.

The evangelism is actually hindering adoption.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com