Thanks for explaining, didn't know that part about memory safety. I agree, for new apps it makes more sense to pick Rust over C/C++ (unless maybe if you're a C veteran). However, if it's just as fast as C/C++, wouldn't it make sense to leave existing C/C++ apps as they are (as long as you don't want to add new functions)? Not judging, just genuinely curious (especially since Rust hat stirred up some drama among Linux maintainers, from what I have heard)

[–] IMALlama@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

There's not a great answer to your question and the 'right' choice is going to be situational. The reason to migrate to Rust is simple: fewer possible bugs should reduce maintenance costs. Whether or not migrating functionality between languages makes sense is another can of worms. Is there enough documentation to avoid the nuanced edge cases that are handled by the current solution's code? Is this a simple port, does it only need interface compatibility, or should a larger area of code be modified? If the code is shared how does the rest of the team feel about the potential language?

I do not know what happened re: drama among Linux maintainers but I seen rumblings about it on Lemmy.

[–] FalschgeldFurkan@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago

Huh, so it's not something simple I have missed regarding why so much software is being rewritten in Rust... I see that appearing so often, so I thought there was maybe a bigger reason I'm not seeing. Anyways, thanks again, appreciate the explanations 👍