[laerus]

Well then raise these concerns and find a way to solve them together. Not dismiss a proven solution to real and even dangerous problems like memory unsafety.

It's unreasonable for educated grown men to react like 12yo children and resist change cause "we don't like eating our vegetables even though they are good for our health". If you actually care about the Linux kernel you will find a way forward even if that means communicating with people or even changing habits.

At the end of the day I don't think that the people that are contributing to the Linux Kernel do it out of good will but rather more about than prestige and building a resume. Or else we wouldn't have this resistance to progress.

[rc00]

This is a horrible comment, much like many of the others on this thread. The long-time contributors to the Linux kernel project have been doing so before there was any "prestige" or resume credentials attached. And if it was just about a resume, wouldn't they have moved on already? This is an ill-conceived take and just another example of some of the pro-Rust crowd being far too unknowledgeable to be upset.

[laerus]

You are not convincing me that these people care about the longevity of the project when they are so smug and ready dismiss anything that is not fitting their whatever agenta, even if that is a supposedly passion for contribution and development.

What you don't understand about what you call "pro-Rust crowd" is that there is a reason to push for memory safety and encoding the invariants in the type-system. It's the closer you can get to a mathematically proven system.

If you don't want one of your most core systems to be as robust as possible against security vulnerabilities, even if that means going out your way either learning something unfamiliar or god forbit communicating, like you have more emotional quality than a potato, with other people then you are a horrible person.