• SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    2 months ago

    Because that’s the inevitability when major changes are introduced, especially when solely for purposes not directly related to bugfixes.

            • trevor@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              12
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              2 months ago

              What time would SpaceNoodle allow? You’re in a thread about Kernel devs talking about contributing new code and why some new code is permissible, but other code, including C code, with fixes for C, are arbitrarily not allowed because it’s coming from a Rust dev.

              With the “refactoring replaces old, working bugs, with new, untested bugs” mindset, you might as well stick with the good stuff from 50 years ago. Those bugs are very well-known.

              • davidagain@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                The Linux kernel folks say that the rust folks missed the deadline for major code changes and the project is currently in minor bug fix mode prior to release. They weren’t prepared to accept thousands of lines of changes at this point on the grounds that introducing new regressions without time to fix them is a real risk. So timing is claimed to be an issue.

              • SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                11
                ·
                2 months ago

                Interesting that you ignore how they were just going to change things for ideological purposes, which was my entire point.

                • trevor@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  That’s an interesting perspective you got there. I hope you adopt the “ideological” mindset that adding fixes and memory safety is generally something you’d want, regardless of the language.

    • kevindqc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      It says “When I tried to upstream minor fixes to the C code to make the behaviour more robust”. That doesn’t sound like a major changes to me and related to some bugs 🤷‍♂️