Google recently rewrote the firmware for protected virtual machines in its Android Virtualization Framework using the Rust programming language and wants you to do the same, assuming you deal with firmware.

In a write-up on Thursday, Android engineers Ivan Lozano and Dominik Maier dig into the technical details of replacing legacy C and C++ code with Rust.

“You’ll see how easy it is to boost security with drop-in Rust replacements, and we’ll even demonstrate how the Rust toolchain can handle specialized bare-metal targets,” said Lozano and Maier.

Easy is not a term commonly heard with regard to a programming language known for its steep learning curve.

Nor is it easy to get C and C++ developers to see the world with Rust-tinted lenses. Just last week, one of the maintainers of the Rust for Linux project - created to work Rust code into the C-based Linux kernel - stepped down, citing resistance from Linux kernel developers.

“Here’s the thing, you’re not going to force all of us to learn Rust,” said a Linux kernel contributor during a lively discussion earlier this year at a conference.

    • Wut? They’re a member, because they find Rust useful. This is just them saying another time that they find Rust useful.
      While they (and everyone using Rust) will benefit off of more people using Rust, it’s not like they have a vested interest to the point of spreading misinformation.

      • They’re a member, because they find Rust useful. This is just them saying another time that they find Rust useful.

        Fans of a programming language stating they like the programming language is hardly thought-provoking stuff. There are also apps written in brainfuck and that means nothing as well.

        • I’m pretty sure that’s not how dyslexia works, but either way, I didn’t write that. And while the title of the article suggests otherwise, the news here isn’t that Google says something is easy. The news is that they published a guide to make that thing easy.

      • Clearly Rust is a conspiracy.

        Anyone in software development who was not born yesterday is already well aware of the whole FOMO cycle:

        1. hey there’s a shiny new tool,
        2. it’s so fantastic only morons don’t use it,
        3. oh god what a huge mistake I did,
        4. hey, there’s a shiny new tool,
          • If you had a grasp on the subject you’d understand that it takes more than mindlessly chanting “tools” to actually get tangible improvements, and even I’m that scenario often they come with critical tradeoff.

            It takes more than peer pressure to make a case for a tool.

            • mindlessly chanting “tools”

              That’s what you were doing in the first place. Instead of evaluating and trying new things, you are putting them in an imaginary cycle, ignoring any actual value that they brings.

              Also Rust has been on your “stage 2” for 10 years. It’s now widely used in multiple mainstream operating systems for both components and drivers, driving part of the world’s internet stack, and is used to build many of those “shiny and new tools”.

        • Yeah, because the new tools are never actually better, right? If condescending luddites like you had your way we’d still be living in the literal stone age. At every step of the way, people like you have smugly said that the older, more established ways of doing things were good enough and new ways were just a fad that would die out.

          Your favorite language was dismissed as fad when it was new. High level languages were a fad. Computing was a fad. Electricity was a fad. See a pattern?

          Nice job projecting with the “only morons” bit, BTW, when it is in fact you who started off by denigrating people whose preferences are different from yours.

          •  lysdexic   ( @lysdexic@programming.dev ) 
            link
            fedilink
            English
            1
            edit-2
            8 days ago

            Yeah, because the new tools are never actually better, right?

            Well, yes. How many fads have come and went? How many next best things already died off? How many times have we seen the next best thing being replaced by the next best thing?

            And yet, most of the world still runs on the same five languages: C, Java, C++, C#, JavaScript.

            How do you explain that, with so many new tools being so much better than everything?

            Might it be because fanboys tend to inflate their own definition of “actually better”, while turning a blind eye to all the tradeoffs they need to pretend aren’t there?

            •  Spore   ( @Spore@lemmy.ml ) 
              link
              fedilink
              English
              7
              edit-2
              8 days ago

              And yet, most of the world still runs on the same five languages: C, Java, C++, C#, JavaScript.

              Did you just assume that those languages exists since the dawn of computing? Or they run the world as long as they came to existence and were never “the new thing”? You are just contradicting yourself at this point to defend yourself from anything you don’t want to accept.

            •  lolcatnip   ( @lolcatnip@reddthat.com ) 
              link
              fedilink
              English
              7
              edit-2
              8 days ago

              I’m old enough to remember when 4 of those 5 languages were the hot new thing. You’d have had me ignore them all and keep using C for everything. If I had done that I wouldn’t have even landed my first job.

              • You’d have had me ignore them all and keep using C for everything.

                Please tell me which language other than C is widely adopted to develop firmware.

                You’re talking about so many up-and-comers during all these decades. Name one language other than C that ever came close to become a standard in firmware and embedded development.

                Right.

      • I mean, I work as a software engineering and if I’m not doing continuing ed, be it about architecture, storage, or new languages, I’m going to be of less value in the marketplace. I’ve learnt languages I didn’t particularly want to in the past for work (though I generally came to tolerate or even like some of them. Not lua, though; lua can go to hell).

        If Rust truly is the better, safer option, then these people are holding everything back.

        •  wewbull   ( @wewbull@feddit.uk ) 
          link
          fedilink
          English
          26
          edit-2
          10 days ago

          “learn Rust” in this case is learn it to a level where all of the little behaviour around cross language integrations are understood and security flaws won’t be introduced. Expert level.

          It’s not “I did a pet project over the weekend”.

          • You are correct and I am aware of that. However, it also seems that they both refuse to learn it and refuse to work with people at that expert level based on the recent drama, which seems very much like holding things back to me.

            • Sure for newcomers to a project like the Linux kernel they have to learn C , because that is what the project is currently written in, but trying to transition the Linux kernel to rust forces people who already are contributing to go and learn rust to be able to continue what they were already doing. And sure you can argue that it’s being done so not everything has to go over at once, but there is a level of rust knowledge required at the interface between the two languages, and that burden is as far as I’ve seen being forced on those long term contributors.

              It’s not the same thing.

              • and that burden is as far as I’ve seen being forced on those long term contributors.

                This is not what is happening. The current long term contributors were asked to clarify semantics about C APIs, so the Rust maintainers could take it from there. At no point were the C maintainers asked to help maintain the Rust bindings.

              • Sure, but it’s very similar. The point is that those people didn’t get to choose the language they’re using and now someone is forcing them to use a specific language. They’ve always been forced to use a specific language.

                I guess it just think “I don’t want to learn” is a lame excuse.

        • It’s not a question of what’s the better option. In reality we have a lot of software that already exists and works, and you can’t replace it all in bulk at the same time. So the question is whether the implementation of Rust makes logistical sense, given the difficulties of maintaining currently existing software while replacing some parts of it.

        • That way we’ll just find maintainers went near extinct over time, just like COBOL developers that are as rare as they are expensive. Only Linux kernel isn’t a bank, and maybe will not have as much money to pay to rare developers capable of maintaining C codebase

          •  lysdexic   ( @lysdexic@programming.dev ) 
            link
            fedilink
            English
            1
            edit-2
            7 days ago

            That way we’ll just find maintainers went near extinct over time, just like COBOL developers that are as rare as they are expensive.

            Care to take a shot at figuring out why COBOL is still used today?

            I mean, feel free to waste your time arguing for rewrites in your flavor of the month. That’s how many failed projects start, too, so you can have your shot at proving them wrong.

            But in the meantime you can try to think about the problem, because “rewrite it in Rust” is only reasonable for the types who are completely oblivious to the realities of professional software development.

            • It’s used because the ones who use it have enough money to pay for any problems that may arise from it’s use, and known problems are deemed better than unknown ones.

              It is a viable model when you have enough money and resources, but a conservative one

              • It’s used because the ones who use it have enough money to pay for any problems that may arise from it’s use, (…)

                That’s laughable. Literally the whole world uses it. Are you telling me that everyone in the world just loves to waste money? Unbelievable.

                • Have you ever worked at large old corporation? Wasting money is a bit of an underestimation on that scale.

                  Also, not all banks use COBOL, but the ones that don’t are usually much younger.

                  Besides, Ada would’ve been a better example, as it is used by telecoms and seems to be held in high regard, unlike COBOL. The only issue with Ada I heard of is that it’s on par with C++ in complexity which is far from being simple.

    • That seems like a poor attitude imo.

      Why do you believe that forcing something onto everyone around you is justifiable? I mean, if what you’re pushing is half as good as what you’re claiming it to be, wouldn’t you be seeing people lining up to jump on the bandwagon?

      It’s strange how people push tools not based on technical merits and technological traits, but on fads and peer pressure.

      • It is literally being pushed for its technical merits and traits.

        Memory safe code with comparable performance in the kernel seems like an absolute no brainer.

        Also if you watch the video all he’s asking for is consistent interfaces for the file systems. He’s not even trying to get them to use rust. And the guy starts screeching about how he’ll code however he wants.

        Is it wrong to expect a consistent and well documented interface?

        Pretty sure C is actually being pushed against its technical merits here.

      • That’s fair. To be clear, I meant minimal experience with the Rust programming language. I’ve mainly tinkered with ESP32 types of MCUs in Arduino and CircuitPython when it comes to firmware, but have much more software experience. In some ways, I found the little bit of Rust that I tried easier because of the tooling - defaulting to a CLI tool to flash rather than an IDE is much more comfortable for me.

        • I’ve been meaning to play with rust, and I’ve always enjoyed tinkering with various MCUs… Although I’m not very strong with firmware/embedded programming.

          Do you think programming an ESP32 is a good project for learning rust?
          Any suggested place to start? (Tutorials, YouTube Vida etc)

          • Do you think programming an ESP32 is a good project for learning rust?

            I’ve only barely scratched the surface there myself but, I absolutely do think so. For several reasons. First, ESP32 is one of the few series of MCUs that support the Rust stdlib. And learning what that entails for Rust is extremely helpful in conceptualizing build targets. Second, MCUs are a very constrained target for software/firmware. Getting comfortable there will likely improve your code efficiency in other code platforms as you are more likely to think about resource usage earlier. And third, there’s some pretty excellent docs and tutorials.

            Any suggested place to start? (Tutorials, YouTube Vida etc)

            For tutorials, my recommended starting point is with the official docs/books themselves:

      • Meh, it’s depends on what you do. I know several low level C engineers who would be far more comfortable rolling a fresh driver over doing some more abstract intro CS projects.