Post #1887740
2026-04-29 13:14 UTC
@josh @swick yeah, i don't buy into that race to the bottom thinking. Designing stuff with the shittiest model in mind instead of the best is just awful engineering. Always figure out where you want to be, i.e. go for the summit — and then fill in the gaps/degrade gracefully where you have to on worse systems. But that's really not what rust is doing there. It's letting itself be held hostage by the worst system, and let's that heavily leak into its APIs...
Replies (1)
-
@kornel@mastodon.social 2026-04-30 02:46
@pid_eins Rust's std::fs and std::io were an MVP for the 1.0 release, and unfortunately mostly stayed like that. Back then Rust still had to prove that the memory safety and data-race guarantees could even work, that it could be stable and backwards-compatible language, while having even bigger unfinished gaps in the language and libstd. Now std::fs sticks out as the weak point, but Rust couldn't take moonshots in every aspect all at once. It would never ship.