Show HN: A udev implementation in Guile Scheme

codeberg.org

17 points·mbakke··7 comments

I was initially surprised because this is not a good use case for Scheme. The current C implementation is clean and efficient, and I'd rather use Scheme to replace some messy Python code with its dependency hell.

And then I saw this: "As mentioned above, some code has been automatically translated from C to Scheme, using generative AI. This is not creative work, and as such, the authors of Goodev cannot claim copyright for it."

Somehow I wish those tokens would had been more usefully spent on porting code where a sound language could actually make a difference.

Not only that, under rule changes in progress it would not be allowed in Guix, which it would appear to be well suited for.

503. also Why?

Because both the implementation and DSL of udev are terrible, probably.

503 seems to be for all of codeberg.org

Codeberg infrastructure needs work...

The README:

> Nothing is wrong with udev. In fact udev is great, as should be obvious from its 20+ years of service on nearly every GNU/Linux system out there. The rule format it pioneered has stood the test of time and can almost be considered a "standard". > > However, udev is not easily usable on systems without systemd and Linux. This project, like eudev and others, aims to address that. Unlike eudev however, this is a completely independent implementation instead of a "fork".

Reply on news.ycombinator.com