What an absolute shitshow

      • mexicancartel@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        43
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 天前

        GNU Coreutils have worked very well for so long so replacing it is totally pointless unless memory safety has crippled the project somehow till now.

        Also I really hate that project for another reason - License

        • mesa@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          2 天前

          Yep. And more distros support so theres more incentive to fix any issues that have popped up. Plus theres more c devs in the world than rust.

        • garbage_world@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          14
          ·
          3 天前

          Rust is faster and easier to develop in than C. It’s also safer.

          What’s wrong with the uutils license?

          • vala@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            45
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            3 天前

            Rust is absolutely not faster or easier than C. It’s safer but that’s it.

            The issue with the rust utils license is that its MIT. Which many people see as vastly inferior to GPL. This is a very big deal to people who believe in the GPL.

            • tempest@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              22
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              3 天前

              It is definitely easier.

              Don’t try and tell me cargo is not easier than fucking around with the C/CPP build slop I’ve had to screw around with over the years.

              The coreutils license is bullshit but let’s not pretend languages have not improved in 50 years.

              • verdare@piefed.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                ·
                3 天前

                Yeah, the only real issue I have with the “rewrite it in Rust” approach is the absolute plague of permissive licensing. It is much easier to write safe, correct code in Rust.

              • Hack3900@lemy.lol
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                7
                ·
                3 天前

                I think it depends on the project, when writing cp you’re not really messing around with libraries so good ol make is fine

              • vala@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                2 天前

                Cargo != Rust

                There is no word in which the borrow checker is easier to deal with than C.

                • tempest@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  2 天前

                  I think responding to borrow checker errors is easier than debugging some random segfault

                  Also I don’t separate the language and it’s build system. I have to use it to write the language it’s an entire kit.

                  Part of c/cpp problem is it’s build system and dependency story just serves to get in my way instead of letting me write code. The syntax is irrelevant when I’m fucking with some auto conf script because the version on my machine is 0.01 versions different.

            • thingsiplay@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 天前

              Rust is absolutely not faster or easier than C. It’s safer but that’s it.

              Depends on what you mean by “easier”. It is easier to write safe code in Rust.

                  • wewbull@feddit.uk
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    2 天前

                    So your statement that it’s easier to write safe code in rust is only (arguably) true for one aspect of safety.

              • MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                3 天前

                Depends on what you do, really.

                Dangers of this project:

                • compatibility in edge-cases
                • experts of their tool vs. jokel of all
                • maturity of the code
                • scope creep
                • thingsiplay@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  3 天前

                  No, it does not depend on what I do. In Rust it is by definition easier to write safe code than in C.

                  • MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    7
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    3 天前

                    Sure does. If the tool was used for 50 years and 1000s times checked (also by criminals), your reimplementarion will not be safer for a whole while, memory safety or not. Especially with that huge scope.