From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-189.mta0.migadu.com (out-189.mta0.migadu.com [91.218.175.189]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A74C11D6182 for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2025 20:22:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=91.218.175.189 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1740687750; cv=none; b=Oahwrw52nGKe/w+6iL7dUmo/pTT5MhymOkiuYHiSFL2YAU8FOLJoIsmcN2CFlSnUPCpsyjS6N/+uIdphd7AeLVSjSESE8xwqWXIzQKWHYVoWk3AjiGYMMukRR8UPlIACtNHsPbrAetEEeLu5OLytG/69POmS30rlRXFBrc3Di8c= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1740687750; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Z45gVQ4/BABMAcmaZRNbhdljY9rJArAfbJeSWnupnBc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=ByD6etbIgNFKXajrRG1WRv4g5jWB1w7WfWiZDduKneRUIu4wgGjb+/l9PWf0O3unMxAhtps+1i+VM8bTSec/HtZ6lOfk5TM1ksZjxg6+TNuELZ3kuhI+aiZ53UALrzncix6HN+BfZybDoZ3Abs4tFEpl4W7Xx0swHSloxjvxpv4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b=GK4Upe8C; arc=none smtp.client-ip=91.218.175.189 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b="GK4Upe8C" Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2025 15:22:20 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1740687745; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=tz5EMPUuI0z3mw5DewhU8kCZLZpqxg/IrSCMDsH6iFk=; b=GK4Upe8CRG7OxybdDSfj6SG9Fu4bLkhzWVZopKoOwXkXD4H07gvV0FhgT4SKjz4XTSc2c6 RnGwlRcet54s8kn75q24aGfZaJl2jKv6/+7exTxVN3lTapKE4niV9XjsAySa/copwsFTmy moakBqBwbeG2PkwslHMdF/JTAcoviJA= X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Kent Overstreet To: Ralf Jung Cc: Ventura Jack , Miguel Ojeda , Gary Guo , torvalds@linux-foundation.org, airlied@gmail.com, boqun.feng@gmail.com, david.laight.linux@gmail.com, ej@inai.de, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, hch@infradead.org, hpa@zytor.com, ksummit@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: C aggregate passing (Rust kernel policy) Message-ID: References: <780ff858-4f8e-424f-b40c-b9634407dce3@ralfj.de> <7edf8624-c9a0-4d8d-a09e-2eac55dc6fc5@ralfj.de> <651a087b-2311-4f70-a2d3-6d2136d0e849@ralfj.de> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: ksummit@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <651a087b-2311-4f70-a2d3-6d2136d0e849@ralfj.de> X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 08:45:09PM +0100, Ralf Jung wrote: > Hi, > > > > > If C was willing to break code as much as Rust, it would be easier to > > > > clean up C. > > > > > > Is that true? Gcc updates do break code. > > > > Surely not as much as Rust, right? From what I hear from users > > of Rust and of C, some Rust developers complain about > > Rust breaking a lot and being unstable, while I instead > > hear complaints about C and C++ being unwilling to break > > compatibility. > > Stable Rust code hardly ever breaks on a compiler update. I don't know which > users you are talking about here, and it's hard to reply anything concrete > to such a vague claim that you are making here. I also "hear" lots of > things, but we shouldn't treat hear-say as facts. > *Nightly* Rust features do break regularly, but nobody has any right to > complain about that -- nightly Rust is the playground for experimenting with > features that we know are no ready yet. It's also less important to avoid ever breaking working code than it was 20 years ago: more of the code we care about is open source, everyone is using source control, and with so much code on crates.io it's now possible to check what the potential impact would be. This is a good thing as long as it's done judiciously, to evolve the language towards stronger semantics and fix safety issues in the cleanest way when found.