Hacker News Reader

Comment by binary132 | Hacker News Reader

maybe. but is it really FALSE?

anyway, the point of the resignation is not wanting to deal with all this, not necessarily taking a side, so I’m not even disagreeing with you. But obviously, it is a disagreeable atmosphere. I don’t find that debatable, even if that’s due to people feeling paranoid about a (nonexistent?) rust religious takeover.

I think we can all admit Rust definitely has its ideologues and cult acolytes.

View on HN

Yes, it's really false. They weren't saying that maintainers couldn't change the API nor that the maintainers who changed the API had to update the Rust part, just that they needed to tell the Rust maintainers what they did and what they intended so that they could correctly encode their underlying assumptions in code.

In other words, they simply requested adequate documentation and the response was "I'M NOT LEARNING RUST AND YOU CAN'T MAKE ME", effectively. That is nontechnical nonsense

> They weren't saying that maintainers couldn't change the API nor that the maintainers who changed the API had to update the Rust part

So maintainer would have to either wait for Rust team to update their API or learn Rust.

Seems like an unnecessary dependency.

Yes, the burden on the C maintainers is low but not zero. In a shared project, other people matter too. If you don't like it you should just work on solo projects.

The religion known as C-ism is sabotaging Linux.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com