►
From YouTube: Is It Time to Rewrite the Operating System in Rust?
Description
QCon San Francisco International Software Conference is back this October 2-6, 2023. Software leaders at early adopter companies will come together to share actionable insights to help you adopt the right technologies and practices.
Get exposed to new ideas and innovative approaches to software development and engineering, guaranteed to inspire and challenge you.
Don’t miss this opportunity to take your knowledge and skills to the next level, and stay ahead in the fast-paced world of technology.
Attend in-person or online with on-demand access.
Register now: https://bit.ly/3jD8ccm
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Video with transcript included: https://bit.ly/2Nq7RW5
Bryan Cantrill explores Rust, explains why it has captured the imagination of so many systems software engineers, and outlines where it might best fit in the deep stack of operating system software.
This presentation was recorded at QCon San Francisco 2018: https://bit.ly/2uYyHLb
For more awesome presentations on innovator and early adopter topics check InfoQ’s selection of talks from conferences worldwide https://bit.ly/2tm9loz
#Rust #OperatingSystems #SystemProgramming #InfoQ #QConSanFrancisco
A
That
I
don't
even
think
I'm
the
first,
maybe
not
even
the
second
presentation,
to
have
a
slide
on
what
even
is
the
operating
system.
I
mean
we're
we're
in
the
OS
track.
Operating
systems
been
around
a
long
time
and
apparently
we
don't
even
know
what
they
are
and
it's
actually
harder
to
define
than
you
might
think.
If
you
think
this
is
easy
by
the
way
just
say
like
what.
A
What
is
software
give
me
a
definition
of
what
software
is
and
I
can
wrap
you
around
the
axle
on
your
definition
of
software,
so
I
guess
I
will
pose
you.
This
follow-up
question
is
Euclid's
GCD
algorithm
software
was
you
could
writing
software
when
he
wrote
the
GCD
algorithm
and
if
your
answer
is
like?
Well,
no,
of
course
not
because
this
predates
hardware
you're
gonna,
it's
gonna
be
very
hard
to
come
up
with
a
self-consistent
answer
to
what
software
is.
I
actually
made.
The
mistake.
A
I
know
Mike
Olson,
who
was
one
of
the
founders
of
cloud
era
and
I
was
up
at
Cloudera
in
very
early
days
or
like
six
people
in
the
office.
I
don't
even
know
why
he
had
me
by,
but
I
was
having
a
weird
day
and
I
was
like
really
grappling
with
this,
like
what
is
software
question
and
they're
like
well
software's
the
thing
that
runs
on
hardware?
It's
like
okay!
A
Are
you?
Are
you
on
drugs?
I
mean
what's
like?
Are
you?
Are
you
high
right
now
I'm
like
no
Mike
I'm,
just
like
what
is
like
I
can't
just
like
talk
about
something
else
or
whatever
get
out
of
here
anyway,
so
you
have
the
same
problem:
the
operating
system,
I
go.
What
is
the
operating
system
or
a
kind
of
any
definition?
Do
we
would
say?
Well,
the
operating
system
is
the
thing
that
abstract
hardware
but
like
well,
how
about
virtual
hardware
I
mean
surely
abstracting
virtual
hardware?
A
Surely
the
guest
operating
system
that
you
run
on
your
AWS
instance
is
surely
an
operating
system?
That's
not
abstracting
Hardware,
not
physical
Hardware,
it's
abstracting
virtual
hardware.
So
it's
really
easy
to
kind
of
migrate
around
or
wander
around
and
not
have
a
record
size
since
I,
Stefan,
ition,
but
I
think
for
our
purposes.
Let's
say
that
an
operating
system
is
the
program
because
it
is
a
program
that
abstracts
the
hardware
to
allow
for
the
execution
of
other
programs.
A
So
I
think
that
the
fact
that
the
operating
system
is
itself
just
a
program,
it's
just
kind
of
a
super
program.
It's
kind
of
an
important
observation.
My
friend
Mike
Demuro
is
here,
was
I,
went
to
work
for
a
company
called
Tara
that
you
haven't
heard
of
Tara,
actually
bought
Cray
and
then
took
craze
name,
which
is
always
an
interesting
sign.
When
you,
when
the
acquiring
company
takes
the
acquired
company's
name,
you
know,
did
not
have
real
good
brand
recognition.
But
Tara
was
a
super
interesting
company.
A
Doing
a
lot
of
interesting
things
and
Michael
is
doing
kernel
development
for
them
and
had
done
that
for
maybe
a
year
or
two
and
he
and
I
caught
up
and
he's
like
you
know
what
I
really
thought
an
operating
system
is
right
as
a
program.
It's
a
complicated
program.
It's
an
asynchronous
program.
It's
an
interrupt
driven
program,
but
I
was
kind
of
offended
by
that
cuz
I'm
like
I'm,
not
just
a
programmer
I'm
a
curl
programmer
like
don't
rob
me
of
my
dignity,
but
then
you
guys
like.
A
Actually
it
is
just
a
program,
it's
a
complicated
program,
but
it
is
a
it's
a
program
that
runs
other
programs.
I.
Do
think
that
if
your
program
doesn't
run
other
programs,
it's
a
lot
of
great
things:
that's
valuable
to
society
and
humanity,
but
we
probably
shouldn't
call
it
an
operating
system
and
I
think
that
the
operate
system
also
should
be
abstracting
Hardware
in
some
way
shape
or
form.
But
even
that
is
it.
A
Is
there
shades
of
gray
there
and
I
think
the
operating
system,
you
have
to
say,
defines
the
liveness
of
the
programs
that
it's
running
if
the
operating
system
dies,
everything
that
it's
running
dies
can't
live
without
the
operating
system?
So
it's
essentially
not
regard
and
we
it's
important
not
to
conflate
the
actual
the
operating
system
with
the
operating
system
kernel
the
operating
system.
Kernel
is
the
thing
that
runs
in
the
privileged
context
of
the
microprocessor.
A
That's
going
to
be
ring
zero
if
your
x86,
although
ring
zero,
becomes
complicated,
because
if
again,
if
you're
in
virtual
hardware,
you're
at
a
virtual
ring
zero
nested
vert,
you
could
be
in
ring
zeros
that
several
rings
away
from
the
actual
hardware.
But
you
are
in
whether
it's
virtual
hardware
or
physical
hardware,
you
are
seeing
the
entire
machine
or
what
you
believe
to
be
the
Machine
virtualization
has
made
this
so
complicated
like
if
everything
has
to
have
asterisks.
A
Now
is
a
lot
easier
when
we
weren't
virtualizing
hardware,
but
the
operating
system
kernel
is
only
one
part
of
the
broader
operating
system.
The
operating
system
also
includes
libraries,
it
includes
commands,
it
includes.
Daemons
includes
facilities,
and,
yes
in
yes,
you
know,
Justin
was
in
his
earlier.
Talk
was
describing
how
we
want
to
strip
all
the
stuff
away.
A
He
blamed
it
all
on
Sun
somewhat
strangely
and
then
said
that
we
needed
to
strip
it
all
away,
and
that
is
true
to
a
point,
but
there's
still
even
in
Justin's
stripped-down
world,
there
are
still
a
bunch
of
components
that
are
running
at
that
highest
level
of
privilege
on
the
microprocessor,
a
virtual
microprocessor,
but
we
would
still
consider
the
operating
systems.
The
operating
system
is
bigger
than
just
the
kernel.
Anything
that
that's
that's
really
important
now
I
mean.
If
you
see
me
talk
before
you
know,
there's
no
way
we're
getting
out
of
here.
A
Without
a
history
lesson,
and
especially
when
we're
talking
about
operating
systems,
we've
got
to
turn
the
wayback
dial
and
we've
got
to
talk
about
history.
So
operating
systems
were
actually
they
used
to
be
called
executives,
which
is
a
very
kind
of
like
strange,
post-world,
War,
two
hierarchical
kind
of
like
I'm,
not
sure
you
know
this
is
like
a
managerial
structure.
I
guess
executives,
I
mean
other
things
that
could
have
been
worse,
but
we
had
executives
for
a
while
and
they
changed
it
to
operating
systems,
and
originally
these
things
were
all
written
in
assembly.
A
Of
course
they
were
all
written
in
machine
code
and
if
there's
you
know,
one
really
interesting
architecture
to
look
at
it's
the
Burroughs
be
5000.
1961
was
a
super
interesting
machine
and
that
was
the
first,
the
first
operating
system,
which
was
called
the
mCP,
which
is
the
master
control
program.
Yes,
if
you've
seen
Tron
it's
a
map
control
program
in
Tron,
if
you
haven't
seen
Tron,
do
not
see
Tron,
it
is
a
terrible
terrible
movie.
A
It
turns
out
Islam
a
not
to
be
confused
with
a
university
in
Ecuador
who's
da.
Is
s
ball
so
probably
a
much
more
famous
s
ball
at
this
point.
But
s
ball
was
this
alcohol
derivative
that
they
wrote
the
mCP
in,
and
this
was
a
machine
that
was
way
ahead
of
its
time
in
many
different
dimensions
and
I
can
tell
you
as
a
technologist
who
has
had
the
misfortune
of
being
ahead
of
my
time
several
times
over.
Being
ahead
of
your
time
is
not
commercially
fruitful.
A
You
know
the
basically
the
biggest
upside
to
being
ahead
of
your
time.
Is
you
apparently
need?
No
introduction
of
the
OS
track,
but
other
than
that,
it's
it's
it's
also
burrows
is
a
machine
is,
is
was
a
wildly
inventive
company,
incredible
machine,
but
you
haven't
heard
of
it
because
they
went
on
business
so,
but
the
mCP
was
really
interesting
and
then
in
1964
project
Mac
at
MIT
was
looking
to
build
a
follow-on
for
CTS
s,
compatible
time
sharing
system
and
they
wanted
to
do
everything
right
now.
A
This
is
something
we
call
second
system
syndrome
and
second
system
syndrome.
Every
time
I
think
second
system
is
a
bit
invented
and
maybe
it's
a
relic.
Maybe
it's
kind
of
mythical
man-month
kind
of
hold
over
the
60s
I
get
hit
by
another
second
system.
So
I
think
it
is
a.
It
is
a
truth.
A
second
system
syndrome
is
hey
as
long
as
we're
gonna
rewrite
this.
We
should
also
rewrite
that
and
revisit
this,
and
we
do.
A
Project
Mac
had
maybe
the
case
of
second
system
syndrome
with
multics
and
multics,
and
then
this
is
also
just
a
misfortune
of
history
in
terms
of
when
they
came
on.
They
knew
they
wanted
to
do
it
in
a
higher-level
language,
but
I
guess
they
just
didn't
like
the
higher-level
languages
that
were
out
at
the
time
now.
On
the
one
hand,
according
to
more
things
like
well,
the
only
thing
that
picks
with
the
only
things
to
pick
from
were
really
Fortran
and
COBOL,
and
that's
actually
not
the
case.
A
So
someone
you
probably
ever
heard
of
named
Jean
Sammet
was
an
early
computer
scientist
and
she
wrote
an
incredible
book
called
programming
languages,
which
is
a
taxonomy
of
programming
languages.
Circa
1963,
when
that
book
was
written
and
known,
tell
you
that
book
is
more
than
two
pages
long.
Okay,
like
there
were,
there
were
a
lot
of
programming
languages,
so
maybe
too
many
programming
languages,
like
you
know,
like
a
Mesozoic
era.
A
Programming
language
is
too
much
co2
in
the
in
the
programming,
language,
atmosphere
or
something
you
know,
80-foot
tall,
ferns
or
whatever,
but
the
there
were
a
lot
of
probably
language
to
pick
from,
but
whatever
they
didn't
like
them
all.
So
fine,
so
we're
gonna.
Do
it
in
this
programming
language
that
hasn't
yet
been
implemented,
but
has
this
really
amazing
specification
called
pl/1?
So
they
did
this
in
in
in
pl/1.
That
is
a
Roman
numeral
one.
A
By
the
way,
if
you
want
to
put
Pele
one
in
your
own
slides,
do
not
call
that
a
that
that's
on
an
Arabic
one,
that
is
a
Roman
one,
very
important
point,
and
so
they
adopted
pl/1,
and
then
they
wrote
the
full
specification
for
multix
with
not
not
only
not
a
line
of
code,
not
a
compiler.
They
didn't
have
a
compiler.
In
fact
they
had
they.
They
decided.
Why
do
you
do
this?
They
like,
let's
outsource
the
compiler,
it's
like
okay,
that
makes
sense.
Let's
outsource
they,
the
first
pl/1
compiler
ever
be
written.
A
We're
gonna
outsource
this
to
this,
like
group,
in
los
angeles,
that
no
one
had
ever
heard
of
who
I
mean
shows
you
how
some
things
never
change,
they're
like
sure
we
could
have
2001
compiler,
and
then
you
know
a
year
later
they
kind
of
fly
out,
be
like
where's,
the
PLO
I.
Think
about
it.
Like
we
don't
know
what
we're
doing
we
cannot
week
away.
We,
we
cannot
implant
a
PLO
on
compilers
all
right.
A
Well,
we
have
no
PL
one
compiler
so,
but
we
have
an
amazing
operating
system
that
has
been
very
detailed,
be
very
specified,
but
we
can't
actually
write
any
of
it
because
they're
Nova
de
parar,
so
this
is
like
ultimate
waterfall
like
a
nightmare
waterfall,
and
so
they
didn't
have
a
puppy
to
power
until
1966
and
I
mean
that
is.
That
is
a
major
problem
now
I
think
it
is
really
funny
about
multics
and
multix
is
one
of
these
things.
A
Well,
you
know
you
didn't
have
a
compiler
for
three
years:
I'm,
not
sure
that
it's
it's
an
unabashed
success,
because
it
to
me
and
again
it's
hard
because
this
is
all
before
I
was
born.
It's
it's
hard
to
know
for
certain,
but
to
me
looking
back
on
it
the
fact
the
compiler
was
not
available
for
so
long
had
to
have
exacerbated
the
decline
of
the
coalition
and
actually
called
in
the
triumvirate
the
triumvirate
that
ran
multics
and,
in
particular,
Bell
Labs
pulled
out
of
the
multics
project,
so
Bell
Labs
is
like
alright
we're
done.
A
This
is
crazy,
like
this
is
not
going
anywhere
like
the
compiler
hasn't
shown
up,
it
doesn't
work.
They
actually
done
because
PL
1
wasn't
there.
They
developed
a
different
dialect
of
PL
one
called
EPL
and
there's
another
things
that
you
read
like
what
the
EPL
people
say.
They're
like
boy
that
we
saved
the
day,
we
came
up
with
a
style
like
them
appeal
one
called
EPL,
then
you
read
Corbett,
oh
he's
like
people
gave
up
with
the
dialogue
to
PA
one,
but
we
never
used
that
it
was
completely
insignificant.
A
So
it's
like
alright
I've
got
no
idea
what
happened.
It's
like
watching
Rashomon
for
operating
systems
anyway,
Bell
Labs
pulls
out
of
multix
1969
and
there's
a
researcher
that
was
formerly
on
the
multics
effort.
Kenny
Thompson,
presumably
implanted
a
one,
implement
a
new
operating
system
and
now
didn't
have
multix
so
implanted
this
thing
on
the
PDP
7.
A
It
was
later
ported
to
the
PDP
11
20
and
it
was
named
UNIX
as
a
wordplay,
if
kind
of
a
somewhat
peculiar
one
on
on
the
complexity
of
multix,
and
you
know
every
time
I
gonna
reread
the
UNIX
history,
I
get
kind
of
something
different
out
of
it.
I
mean
there.
Is
it's
unquestionable
that
eunuchs
a
lot
came
together
at
eunuchs
in
terms
of
the
the
late
60s,
especially
the
early
70s?
They
were
in
the
right
place
at
the
right
time.
A
One
of
the
things
that
I
see
especially
reading
it
side
by
side
of
the
multix
history
is.
It
was
really
top-down.
Software
versus
bottom-up
software
and
multics
was
very
top-down.
Commanding
control,
right
specification,
maybe
we'll
get
a
compiler.
Maybe
we
won't
kind
of
software.
Unix
was
like
Alice
just
gets
up
and
working
and
then
I'll
get
something
to
work
in
and
then
we'll
we'll
write
a
man
page
for
whatever
we
already
got
working
and
it
was.
A
It
was
very
organic
and
I
think
that
the
world
was
ready
for
that
kind
of
software
model,
and
you
begin
to
realize
it
kind
of
you
know
looking
at
it
in
the
larger
lens
of
what
was
going
on
socially
and
everything
else.
The
as
my
my
mother
is
fond
of
reminding
me
that
the
because
I
did
I
wasn't
alive
in
1968.
I've
got
no
idea
what
a
society
on
the
brink
actually
looks
like
every
time.
I
complained
about
the
president
has
nothing.
A
Like
all
right,
all
right,
mom,
fine,
you
know
mom
you're
kind
of
confirming
the
stereotype
of
baby
boomers.
So
let's
move
on,
but
he
in
particular
UNIX
was
implemented
entirely
in
assembly
and
I.
Think
it's
it's
a
bit
of
a
myth
that
that
UNIX
was
implemented
in
C.
It
wasn't.
It
was
important
in
a
seminal
uv7.
It
was
ported
to
assembly
on
the
P
to
be
allowing
and
yes,
there
was
be.
There
was
a
dis
interpreted
language
that
was
B.
A
That
was
around
it's
a
BCPL
derivative
B
had
a
there's,
a
very
kind
of
like
strange
kind
of
connection
to
multix,
in
that
that
b
and
e
PL
we're
both
implemented
in
this
thing
called
TM
g
TM
g.
I
know
that
sounds
like
a
teen
web
series
that
my
kids
would
watch
I
feel
like
I
would
like
my
14
year
old.
A
We
watching
the
latest
episode
of
TMJ,
but
no
TMG
was
the
transmogrifier
that
was
a
transpiler
and
b
was
actually
interpreted
and
the
actually
TM
g
and
another
kind
of
sorry
footnote
on
a
footnote
was
implanted
by
robert
morris
bob
morris,
the
father
of
Robert
Morris
jr..
Who
was
the
Morris
worm,
even
though
I
think
Paul
Graham
begins
like
his
eye?
A
Twitch
is
what
everyone
says:
the
Morris
worm,
because
he
and
Robert
Morris
patterned
company
together,
doesn't
like
anyone
to
talk
about
the
Morris
worm,
but
it
wasn't
Tan's
attendance
but
so
be
actually
was
only
used
and
he's
like
super
auxilary
capacities
in
in
unix
and
the
it
was
using
the
assembler.
It
was
using
an
early
version
of
DC
DC,
a
command
that
you
only
may
know
from
miss
typing,
CD
you're
it
and
that's
where
it's
like.
A
You
want
to
like
CD
to
your
home
directory
or
whatever
you
just
like
CD
entering
your
a
DC
enter
and
you're
like
wait.
What
just
happened
and
you're
like
a
captive
prompt
and
you're
like
control
c,
and
it's
like
eats
the
control,
see
you're
like
what
is
going
on
you're
at
control
d
like
quit,
you're
like
I,
don't
know
how
to
quit
or
whatever
it
says.
I
just
say
that
it
doesn't
actually
say
anything.
Dc
is
a.
It
reflects
its
B
heritage.
Suffice
it
to
say
I'm,
but
do
they
realize
that
B
was
not
gonna?
A
Do
it
didn't
perform
on
they
needed
a
much
higher
performing
language
than
B
in
particular
day
Dennis
Ritchie
in
Ken
Thompson
saw
the
power
of
implementing
the
operating
system
in
higher-level
language,
but
they
knew
that
B
in
particular,
had
no
byte
address
ability.
So
the
lack
of
byte
address
ability
was
gonna,
be
a
big
problem,
so
they
came
up
with
a
new
language
that
they
called
C
and
so
C
followed
on
for
be
kind
of
it
made
sense,
but
again,
contrary
to
the
myth.
These
are
they.
They
are
not
twins,
they're,
not
born.
A
At
the
same
time,
UNIX
is
born.
Unix
begats
C
in
a
very
important
I
guess
biblical
way.
Their
siblings
are
not
they're,
not
twins
and
UNIX
is
very
much.
The
older
sibling
and
so
C
is,
is
rightfully
called
portable
assembly
I,
like
the
people,
call
portable
and
C
portable
assembly
as
a
slur,
but
I
view
it
as
praise
I
love
I
mean
like
why
it's
assembly,
and
it's
portable.
That
sounds
great.
A
I
there's
a
lot
that
is
great
about
C
and
C
also
was
way
ahead
of
its
time,
and
if
you
look
at
those
other
programming
languages
from
that
era,
and
then
you
look
at
C,
they
are
mning
into
modernity.
Suddenly,
first
of
all,
the
caps
lock
key
disappears.
It
feels
like
every
language
prior
to
see
was
like
screamed.
A
It's
like
I
said,
was
the
caps
lock
key
broken,
and
you
know
I
I
like
to
to
collect
old
programming
manuals
and
I
bought
a
kind
of
a
weird
lot
from
someone
in
the
UK,
and
this
box
shows
up
it's
like
a
bunch
of
crap
and
then
there's
this
manual
for
this
language
called
language
H
and
language.
H
is
a
COBOL
derivative
that
you've
not
heard
of
for
a
reason.
This
is
an
NCR
Elliott
initiated
language
that
had
sterling
as
a
key
word.
A
Every
language
H
program
begins
with
chapter
1
and
you're
like
oh,
ok,
all
right.
This
is
cool
like
it's
a
book
like
I,
get
it
like.
Whatever
it's
like
super
new
computing,
a
super
new
and
a
book
is
the
is
the
best
they
don't
like,
and
then
you
chapter
one
it'll
be
like
you
know
sterling
and
you
die
today.
They're
talking
on
tapes
and
all
these
kind
of
calculations,
and
then
every
program
there's
no
chapter
2.
A
By
the
way,
it's
only
tap
on
the
every
program
ends
with
the
keyword
obey
it's
like
what
like
how
about
epilogue
or
end
doesn't
make
any
sense.
It's
like
now,
all
of
a
sudden
he's
all
like
orders,
the
Creator
or
whatever
it
doesn't
make
sense,
and
so
that's
what
we
went
from
like
obey
and
chapter
1
to
modernity,
kind
of
in
a
very
short
period
of
time
and
the
the
C
Revolution
was
it
was
real
on
and
it
was
organic
and
I.
Think
one
thing
is
interesting
again.
A
If
you
look
at
this
multics
as
this
top-down
approach,
this
kind
of
command
and
control
approach
and
UNIX
as
this
more
bottom-up
approach.
One
of
the
differences
you
see
is
that
see
kind
of
grew
things
as
it
needed
them.
The
first
imitation
of
C
didn't
have
structures
they
added
trying
to
admittedly
structures
around
in
1973.
This
came
in
early,
but
they
didn't
actually
implement
the
UNIX
kernel
in
C
until
they
had
structures
they
employed
instructors
because
they
needed
them
for
the
UNIX
kernel
uhm.
A
A
One
of
these
conditions
is
true
or
the
other
tation
is
true,
but
not
both
of
them,
and
at
least
one
of
them
like
that
logical,
XOR
and
you'll
know
you're.
In
my
code,
because
that
code
has
that
assertion
yes
done
with
bitwise
exercise,
I
know
how
to
do
it:
okay,
with
an
extra
line
of
code
and
then
a
block
comment
like
cursing
the
ghost
of
Dennis
Ritchie
for
not
having
logical
XOR.
Even
more
galling
actually
was
bi
worked
with
a
guy
Roger
Faulkner
who
worked
with
Dennis,
Ritchie
and
I
was
complaining
about
this.
A
He
said
you
know,
there's
no
logic
works
for
because
law,
clerks
or
can't
storm
circuit
I'm
like
ma
I,
know
that
logic
works,
one
can
short-circuit
but
like
didn't.
These
are
it's
some
sort
of
biblical
commandment
that
logical
operations
must
be
able
to
sort
so
he's
like
no
I'm
just
telling
you
that
that's
the
reason
I'm
like
that's,
that's
not
the
reason.
A
It's
like
well
I'm,
gonna,
ask
I'll,
ask
Dennis
but
go
ask
Dennis,
do
it
and
of
course
Dennis
amelie
replies,
I,
don't
know
we
don't
have
a
lock
store
because
they
can't
short-circuit
and
you
should
just
use
bitwise
I'm
thinking
anyway.
So
I
was
wrong,
but
so
there
was
this
kind
of
organic
growth.
The
organic
growth
was
was
important
in
particular.
See
grew,
very
important
facilities
like
macro
processing,
macro
processing
and
rust
has
actually
caused
me
to
reflect
back
on
my
own
use
of
macros,
because
it's
one
of
things
I,
absolutely
love
about
rust.
A
A
The
the
preprocessor
is
really
essential,
as
a
central
person
DTrace
is
essential
in
CFS
was
essential
for
a
lot
of
the
things
we've
done
because
but
the
preprocessor
it
leaves
a
lot
to
be
desired.
There
were
standardization
efforts,
but
they
came
late.
They
were
content
tests
and
so
on.
So
through
the
80s
see
just
dominated
and
it
was
an
excellent
fit
for
operating
systems.
A
Essentially
every
OS,
with
some
exceptions,
I
know
the
Mac
was
in
pascal,
find
it
was
gonna,
be
one
of
those
in
every
class,
and
there
were
there
were
some
research
operating
systems.
I
don't
imply.
This
is
the
totality
of
operating
systems,
but
the
vast
majority
of
reduction
systems
were
there
and
see,
or
they
were
still
in
assembly
because
they
were
Dass,
but
many
of
them
were
were
in
sea.
In
the
1990s,
a
great
darkness
came
across
the
land.
A
It
was
really
a
terrible
time
to
be
alive,
I'm
convinced
so
the
and
now
I
can
speak
from
personal
experience.
I
really
would
it
really
felt
very
because
obviously,
my
programming
we
felt
like
there
was
this
kind
of
this
mission.
This
industrial,
complex,
object-oriented,
us
triol,
complex
that
then
insisted
that
everything
be
object-oriented
and
the
sea
based
systems
were
thought
to
be
relics.
A
Everything
was
gonna,
be
any
sea
based
system
was
the
walking
dead,
and
this
is
all
gonna
be
replaced
by
these
beautiful
C++
systems
or
Java
based
systems
that
are
going
to
replace
all
this.
So
you
can
keep
working
on
this
legacy
garbage
if
you
want,
but
all
of
us
are
going
to
go
over
here.
All
the
the
flowery
people
are
getting
over
here.
The
architects
are
going
to
architect
this
great
beauty
and
all
of
those
systems
failed
and
they
failed
I.
A
Think
for
a
bunch
of
reasons,
but
one
is
they
were
all
framed
as
second
systems
and
they
a
lot
of
them
suffered
from
the
second
system
syndrome.
So
apples,
Copeland
I
mean
I.
Do
you
know?
Kids
grew
up
today
to
think
of
Apple
as
the
trillion
dollar
company
I
still
remember,
when
Gil
Amelio
was
running
Apple
and
every
other
Silicon
Valley
company
was
eyeing
them
for
their
real
estate
because
they
couldn't
ship
an
operating
system.
They
had
the
second
season
called
Copeland.
It
was
going
nowhere.
Son
had
spring,
there
was
written
all
in
C++.
A
Please
I
was
an
undergraduate
at
the
time.
We
got
this
like
this
hot
release
of
spring.
He
thought
we
would
get.
We
were
getting
like
some
sort
of
something
that
was
like
illegal
I
mean
it
was
like.
Okay,
I'm
gonna
give
this
to
you
on
a
CD,
but
it's
amazing
and
you
run
it
it's
like.
Is
this
a
hard
drive
stress
test,
because
all
this
thing
is
doing
is
rattling
the
spindle
and
it's
just
under
I,
go
how
much
DRAM
do
you
have
and
now
and
at
the
time
this
is
a.
A
This
is
a
souped-up
machine
that
had
32
megabytes
of
vram
and
they're
like
well.
Oh,
no!
No!
No,
that's
not
nearly
enough
to
you
need
to
have
128
megabytes
of
DRAM,
which
is
like
saying
today.
Oh
you
only
have
512
gigs
of
DRAM
yeah
you're
gonna
need
like
2
terabytes
of
diorama
yeah,
who
has
that
like?
Well
all
the
spring
developers.
A
Have
that,
like
that's
a
bad
idea
like
I
died,
do
I
need
to
tell
you
that
that's
a
very
bad
idea
to
give
you
don't
want
to
give
your
OS
developers
so
much
memory
because
they'll
use
it
all,
and
then
it
can't
be
used
on
a
system.
That's
got
so
there
was
some
spring.
There
was
talent
and
we
were
heard
of
talents.
Do
you
know
yeah
so
you're
so
tower?
Gent
was
talent
was
gonna
rule
us
all,
so
talent
was
going
to
it
was
IBM
and
Apple.
A
It
was
the
best
and
the
brightest
were
going
to
to
go
up
to
the
ivory
tower
and
hand
us
down
the
operating
system
that
we
would
run
couchant
as
it
turns
out.
I
actually
didn't,
thankfully,
didn't
know
this
at
the
time
I
might
have
I
might
have
really
gone.
Nominator
Towser
turns
out
it's
a
portmanteau
of
talented
and
intelligent.
A
Like
boy,
it's
like
how
about
arrow
hole.
How
about
that?
Like?
That's
a
call
your
company,
that
and
and
as
it
turns
out,
they
like
nailed
the
worst
of
IBM
meeting
the
worst
of
Apple
in
an
effort
that
was
a
total
disaster
and
it
and
again
in
they
were
gonna.
Do
this
this
kind
of
sovereign
system,
and
they
just
and
it
wasn't
this
way
their
fault
it
was
getting,
is
like
because
they
were
taking
this
from
scratch
approach.
A
It's
just
that
it
attracts
all
sorts
of
abstraction
garbage
like
some
sort
of
terrible
abstraction
fly
strips
so
and
then
the
job
of
these
hopping
systems
I
mean
I,
was
at
Sun,
so
I'm.
You
know
I'm
obligated
to
remind
us
all
that
Java
OS
actually
went
nowhere.
We
did
this
we're
gonna
do
job
everywhere
gives
you
job.
Miss
microprocessors
would
do
a
job.
Os
Java
had
no
unsigned
type
hard
to
talk
to
Harbor.
A
We
have
no
unsigned
type
as
it
turns
out,
so
that
did
that
didn't
didn't
work
very
well,
but
then
Linux
arrived
and
the
nice
thing
about
Linux
enough
excited
six.
Is
that
UNIX
had
a
huge
resurgence
and
but
with
that
see
based
systems
became
really
deeply
entrenched
and
there
there
were
a
bunch
of
C++
efforts,
they
all
kind
of
withered,
and
there
I
mean
there
are
exceptions
to
this.
You
know.
Haiku
is
an
exception
to
this,
but
you
know
when
haiku
is
is
listed
as
your
example
of
a
serious
attempt.
A
A
There's
a
language
on
the
browser
and
okay
I've
got
to
use
it
because,
like
I
need
to
build
something,
that's
gonna
be
this
kind
of
web
app
and
I
again,
like
I.
Think
a
lot
of
people
waited
in
the
JavaScript
I
mean
I
was
like
this
is
a
real
language.
Actually,
this
is
like
this
actually
is
Lisp
in
disguise
in
the
browser,
but
with
no
parentheses
and
I
kind
of
hate.
The
parentheses
so
I'm
not
fun.
A
To
that
and
to
JavaScript
was
super
interesting
I
mean
there
are
a
lot
of
things
that
were
interesting
about
that,
but
all
those
languages
we
focus
on
the
developer
in
development
and
the
speed
of
Dylan.
The
pace
of
development.
I
cannot
bring
myself
to
put
developer
velocity
on
a
slide
because
it
makes
me
want
to
throw
up,
but
that
is
what
we
were
trying
to
do.
A
Exactly
a
lot
of
mistakes
were
made.
I
know,
I
was
experimenting,
I
wasn't,
it
was
age-appropriate.
I
know
that
makes
subtle
sense,
but
there
would
be
a
lot
of
problems
making
a
ruby,
OS
or
python.
Oh
I
said
it
wouldn't
be.
It
would
be
something
you
would
do,
because
you
were
in
college,
which
is
fine,
but
there
were
no
real,
serious
efforts,
so
we
hit
kind
of
I
guess
what
we're
gonna
end
up,
calling
the
teens,
which
makes
no
sense
to
me,
but
we
hit
the
20
to
the
2010s
and
system.
A
That
is
that
there
there
was
a
JavaScript
war
in
the
browser
which
led
to
some
very
powerful
JavaScript
runtimes
v8
in
particular,
that
we
could
actually
run
on
the
server
and
we
could
run
reasonable
servers
writing
in
JavaScript
on
the
server
side
nodejs,
and
that
was
really
interesting
now,
as
it
turns
out
that
left
a
lot
to
be
desired
because
it's
still
JavaScript
but
yeah
I
love
JavaScript.
I
but
I
javascript
is
the
failed
state
of
programming
languages.
A
The
in
that
javascript
is
wants
anything
to
go,
wants
to
allow
so
much
that
it
can
become
difficult
and
things
like
typescript
kind
of
came
into
that
gap
and
so
on,
but
in
JavaScript
wasn't
necessarily
yet
for
we
used
it
a
lot
of
joint,
but
there
are
lots
of
challenges
in
the
broader
world.
First
for
system
software,
the
Bell
Labs
refugees
at
Google,
developer,
they'd
like
to
be
called
that
or
not
I
mean
that
is
praise,
not
not
damnation,
but
on
develop,
go
of
course.
A
Maybe
we'll
use
go
go
definitely
solve
some
of
these
problems,
but
there
are
some
idiosyncrasies
I'm
trying
to
put
that
in
the
best
possible
way.
I.
Could
there
are
some
idiosyncrasies
if
you
didn't
see
it?
Aaden's
I
had
a
great
talk
earlier
on
G
Weiser
and
some
of
the
the
I
would
say
both
the
promise
and
the
peril
of
go
for
a
very
creative
use
case.
A
One
of
the
problems
with
go
from
an
operating
system
perspective
is
that
go
and
jobs,
work
and
others
are
GC
their
garbage
collected,
and
they
are
very
mean
speaking
for
v8,
because
I
know
v8
better
than
Co.
It's
very
sophisticated
GC
I
mean
it's
very
sophisticated,
arbors
collection,
but
it's
still
garbage
collection
and
garbage
collection.
Even
when
it's
sophisticated,
it's
not
the
garbage
collect.
A
If
you
like
to
blame
the
garbage
collector,
it's
like
the
garbage
collectors,
ruining
my
processes
that
you
know
the
garbage
is
ruining
your
process
like
you're,
creating
the
garbage
designed
to
GC
hates
you
it
just
like
stop
creating
crap
and
the
GC
won't
have
to
do
this
or
worse.
Stop
creating
these
huge
mean
when
the
GC
is
really
exhausting
itself.
It's
because
you
have
a
memory
leak.
It's
like,
but
I,
can't
remember
in
legacy
scene.
A
It's
like
us
is
exactly
how
we
got
here,
but
you,
because
what
you
have
is
a
big
object,
graph,
that's
very
connected
and
in
JavaScript
it's
very
easy
to
accidentally
have
a
closure
that
has
a
reference
into
this
big
object
graph
and
now
none
of
this
can
go
away
because
it's
not
garbage
it's
not
a
garbage
collector.
It's
a
heap
scanner
and
it's
not
binding
it
if
they
it's
scanning
your
very
well.
Thank
you
very
much,
and
this
is
tough.
A
This
is
just
tough
and
it
makes
it
like
GC,
I,
I,
honor,
GC,
I
I.
Think
it's
great
for
a
lot
of
software,
but
there's
a
class
of
system
software,
for
which
GC
just
doesn't
work,
and
it
doesn't
work
because
you
don't
have
predictable
performance
because
the
Layton
sees
can
be
significant
and
because
I
think,
because
it
doesn't
force
the
programmer
to
really
think
about
this
stuff
and
I.
Think
thinking
is
important
for
wait.
A
That
sounds
pejorative
the
way
I'm
gonna
raise
it
by
no
means
pejoratively
I
think
there
is
a
class
of
software
for
which
I
I
don't
mind,
requiring
deeper
thought
upfront
and
then
there's
another
class
of
software
for
like
hey,
let's
get
something
working
and
that's
fine.
So
it's
did.
This
is
not
like.
The
entire
world
should
be
GC
door.
None
of
the
world
should
you
be
GC
I
actually
do
think
there
are
right
tools
for
the
job,
but
for
system
software
for
the
operating
system.
A
I
was
actually
at
a
bit
of
a
quandary
because,
like
the
node
thing,
like
wasn't
working
out,
I
was
kind
of
getting
out
of
a
bad
relationship
on
that
one,
and
then
it's
like
what
what's
next
and
like
C++
I
had
done
way
too
much
Depot
supposed
to
talk
about
college
I
done
way
too
much,
T,
plus
plus
so
Stephen
and
Ruby
OS
I
had
written
a
hundred
thousand
lines
C++.
They
were
both
age.
Appropriate
mistakes
I
think
we
would
say
in
retrospect,
I
didn't
want
to
go
back
to
C++.
A
It
was
like
no
no
but
C
Mo's,
Moses
I,
totally
change
now,
like
that's
great
for
C++
and
I,
want
C++
to
have
a
happy
and
productive
life,
but
steeple
I
suppose
dragged
all
my
into
the
street,
lit
it
on
fire,
so,
like
I
am
NOT
going
back
to
C++
ever
and
that's
not
a
value
judgment.
That's
just
like
that's
self-preservation.
Why
I'm
not
going
back
to
C
with
less
so
forget?
A
C++,
it's
not
going
to
see
bus
boss,
even
though
again
I
honor
the
change
they
made
to
it
all
right
and
it
kind
of
like
looking
at
this
I
was
getting
increasingly
excited
about.
Russ
Russ
was
really
interesting
and
I
think
how
many
people
are
aware
of
rust.
Okay,
what
hands,
how
many
people
have
kind
of
pined
after
rust,
but
haven't
written
any
okay?
How
many
VX
you
been
rust?
That's
a
good
number!
Actually,
oh
yeah!
A
It's
a
good
number
right,
yeah,
it's
gonna,
but
okay,
but
a
lot
of
you
were
in
the
category
that
I
was
in.
Not
that
long
ago,
which
is
kind
of
like
I,
was
seriously
rust,
curious
I!
You
know,
I
was
like
reading
all
the
blog
entries
and
kind
of
like
you
know
like
it's
like
go
out
like
that
looks
interesting,
and
this
looks
interesting
and
I'm
like.
But
what
do
you
put
whitespace?
You
know
cuz
I
got
all
you
gotta
find
a
reason
to
hate
it,
which
is
wrong
right.
A
You
don't
wanna,
do
that
like
get
over
your
whitespace.
This
is
why
I've
learned
a
tough
lesson,
but
like
I
I
was
really
interested.
If
I
was
intrigued
by
rust
and
in
particular,
and
the
values
of
rust,
really
represented
the
values
that
I
have
for
my
own
software,
so
values
in
the
values
of
rust.
That
said
very
upfront,
you
go
to
any
rust
website.
A
We
are
really
lucky
because
I
you
most
of
us
are
software
developers
and
we
are
lucky
to
be
alive.
Now
we
live
in
a
golden
age
of
this
stuff.
The
our
descendants
will
look
back
at
this
time,
as
this
is
like
amazing
time
when
all
this
offer
was
being
written.
And
now
that
said,
some
of
the
software
is
not
gonna.
Last
forever.
A
Some
of
the
software
we
are
gonna
have
to
to
rewrite
with
software
that
can
survive
in
perpetuity
and
what
I
see
from
rust
is
that
aspiration
for
if
in
perpetuity
and
the
the
I
know,
rust
has
like
eight
different
origin
stories.
All
from
grading
I
mean
Graydon
came
up
with
an
it
has
got
like
eight
different
reasons.
Why
call
the
trust,
but
the
one
that
I
like?
A
Is
that
I,
like
kind
of
that
industrial
sense
of
building
things
that
that
survives,
such
that
the
chemical
reaction
with
oxygen
is
like
their
biggest
problem
on
that's
pretty
neat,
so
Russ
is
really
interesting.
The
thing
that
is
super
interesting
about
Russ
and
to
the
best
of
my
knowledge,
unique,
is
the
notion
of
ownership.
A
So
Russ
is
able
to
statically
figure
out
who
owns
what
and
when
you,
you
being
like
the
threat
of
control
own
the
memory
that
you're
dealing
with
and
when
you
don't
and
when
you
don't
when
you're
done
when
it
realizes
like
okay
you're
done
with
this
I
will
take
care
of
freeing
this.
For
you,
there
is
no
free
in
rust
per
se.
In
memory
is
allocated
for
you
and
then
it
is
freed
when
you
were
done
with
it
now.
That
is
it
that
the
compiler
makes
this
huge
bargain
with
you.
A
It's
like
the
compiler
says
to
you.
I
will
do
this,
for
you
I.
The
russ
compiler
will
do
this.
I
will
give
you
this
incredible
superpower,
where
you
don't
need
to
think
about
this,
but
you're
gonna
need
to
help
me
out
and
you're
gonna
need
to
help
me
out
when
I
don't
know
where
this
memory
is
going
or
who
owns
it.
So
I'm
gonna
allow
you
to
lend
this
memory
out.
I'm
gonna.
Allow
you
a
car
to
borrowing
right,
but
I
need
to
know
when
it
comes
back
and
sometimes
I
get
confused.
A
So
there
is
a
demographic,
probably
a
big
demographic
done,
a
lot
of
folks
for
whom
it's
like
the
great
thing
about
that
is
memory,
safety
that
I
can't
overwrite
anyone
else's
memory,
and
that
is
really
important.
I
I'm
not
gonna
I'm
not
going
to
have
you
know,
be
zeroes
that
have
got
the
wrong
size
on
them.
Mem
copies
that
have
the
wrong
I'm,
not
going
to
more
things.
I
love
about
rust,
among
other
things,
is
rust.
There's
lots
of
kinds
of
data
corruption
that
rust
prevents.
A
One
thing
is
when
you
initialize
the
structure,
you
have
to
initialize
all
fields
and
on
the
one
you
okay,
it
rust
get
out
of
my
grill
like
why
do
I
have
to
digitize
all
of
these,
and
the
rest
should
be
like.
What's
your
problem
like,
why
don't
you
want
to
initialize
this
like
you're,
the
one
with
a
problem
like
you
initialize,
this
give
me
a
value.
I
give
it
to
me:
zero
put
a
zero
there.
Fortunately,
like
the
Russ,
compiler
doesn't
like
get
that
belligerent
with
you.
A
Oh
I,
don't
think
you
meant
this
I
think
you
meant
about
this
thing
and,
like
here's,
exactly
what
I'm
like
look
I
got
all
these
ascii
colors,
where
I'm
showing
you
exactly
where
it
is
and
you're
like.
Why
are
you
being
so
helpful?
This
is
great.
It's
like
just
remember
this
later.
Okay,
just
like
remember
my
helpfulness
at
your
darkest
hour,
because
your
darkest
hour
is
probably
coming
so
I
actually
do
I,
love,
I,
love,
love,
love,
the
Russ
compiler,
and
the
reason
this
is
important
is
for
me
memory.
A
Safety
isn't
as
big
of
an
issue
because-
and
this
is
gonna
sound
I-
don't
want
to
sound
arrogant,
but
this
is
like
I
can
write,
correct,
see,
I
and
now
I've
got
another
hard
way.
It's
not
something
that
I
would
recommend
for
everybody,
but
like
I,
can
write,
correct,
see
and
I've
written
a
lot
of
correct.
C
I
can
write
C
that
frees
memory
properly,
that
that
doesn't
overwrite
and
that
basically
doesn't
suffer
from
memory.
Corruption.
The
arithmetic
overflows,
are
a
lot
harder.
A
Actually,
Russ
actually
helps
do
that
that
one
I'm
not
going
to
make
the
claim
because
I've
been
there.
Those
are
super
hard,
but
the
on
memory
safety
I
can
I
can
do
that.
But
Russ
is
still
valuable
for
me,
because
what
it
would
I
can
do
that
because
I'm
controlling
heaven
and
earth
in
my
software
it
makes
it
very
hard
to
compose
software,
because,
even
if
you
and
I
both
know
how
to
write
memory
safe,
see
it's
very
hard
for
us
to
have
an
interface
boundary
where
we
can
agree
about.
Who
does
what?
A
So,
you
know
had
a
free
memory
properly
and
I
know
how
to
free
memory
properly.
Oh,
but
I
didn't
realize
that
in
that
era,
condition
I
was
supposed
to
free
the
handle
that
you
had
given
me,
not
you
or
I,
it's
just
it's
a
miscommunication
and
it's
really
easy
to
see
is
very,
very
hard
to
compose
properly
and
one
of
the
things
that
we
do
a
lot
actually
to
compose
see.
Is
we
use
something
called
intrusive
data
structures
where
you
embed
nodes
of
a
data
structure
in
your
larger
structure,
which
is
great
for
C?
A
It's
terrible
for
Ross
we'll
talk
about
that
in
a
bit
but
rust.
It
allows
you
to
actually
compose
truly
compose
because
you
don't
need
to
worry
about
the
the
borrowed.
Checker
has
assured
that
you
that
the
contracts
for
who
owns
what
are
implicitly
abided
by
and
that
it's
it's
amazing.
It
really
is
amazing
because
it
you
can
build
these
really
sophisticated
primitives,
and
in
my
experience
and
again
you
know,
everyone's
mileage
may
vary
and
I'm
not
trying
to
you.
A
Have
this
blog
entry,
comparing
the
performance
of
Ross,
the
performance
of
C
for
my
application
and
I
have
like
these,
like
eight
paragraphs,
trying
to
explain
how
this
is
not
trying
to
draw
broader
conclusions
about
the
performance
of
severs
the
performances.
But,
of
course
it's
like
it's
the
Internet's.
The
first
columns
like
I,
can't
believe
this
jerk
things
that
Russ
is
always
faster
than
say
it's
like
that's,
not
what
I'm
saying
for
the
software
that
I
wrote
the
the
I
had
a
body
of
software
that
was
in
C.
A
It
was
to
see
an
end,
node
I,
rewrote
it
and
rust,
and
when
I
rewrote
and
rust,
my
expectations
were.
Why
should
say
when
I
was
doing
that
I
was
almost
inhibited
by
the
fact
that
I
was
effectively
porting,
my
C,
because
I
tried
to
do
some
of
the
things
the
same
way:
I
had
done
them
and
C
and
in
particular
in
C.
We
have
multiple
ownership
all
the
time.
So
when
you
and
doubly
linked
list
is
actually
two
linked
lists
right
and
a
given
object
is
actually
owned
by
two
things.
A
The
thing
your
your
next
thing
and
your
previous
thing:
they
both
think
they
own
you
rust,
does
not
want
to
do
that.
I
mean
you
can't
do
it
and
there's
a
great
blog
entry,
but
what
series
of
blog
entries
on
so
you
really
want
to
write
a
doubly
linked
list
and
rust.
You
really
don't
want
to
do
it
and
what
you
want
to
do
is
with
rust
and
I.
Think
at
the
end
and
the
whole
rust
community
has
been
very
upfront
about
this.
A
Bargain
that
you're
buying
into
with
rust
is
you
want
to
rethink
your
problem
and
implement
it
in
a
way
that
makes
your
ownership
clear?
So
if
you
convey
your
ownership,
queerly
rust
will
give
you
very
high
performing
code
as
a
result
like
okay
I
can
buy
that
so
I
had
done
so
many
things.
I've
got
five
minutes
until
we're
done
boy
that
went
fast.
All
right,
we're
gonna
pick
up
base.
A
That's
fine,
all
right,
false
alarm,
false
sense
of
time
so
the
in,
but
in
my
experience
the
so
I
would
go
in
for
the
singing
Ross
I've
made
all
these
compromises,
because
I
just
got
to
the
point
where
I
got
so
beaten
down,
I
mean
I
wanna
question,
but
I
I
was
bargaining.
I
was
in
the
bargaining
phase.
I'm
like
I
will
do
anything
to
get
this
working.
I
got
any,
did
I
get
this
work.
Cuz
I
was
trying
to
make
it
high-performing
and
do
what
I
doesn't
say.
A
I'm
like
I
need
to
stop
doing
that.
I
just
need
to
get
this
damn
thing
working,
so
I
got
it
working
and
I'm
like
I.
Don't
think
it's
gonna
have
anywhere
near
the
performance
of
C
because
I
the
way
I
did.
It
was
so
dumb.
I
mean
it's
like
I:
just
did
it
like
the
knuckleheaded
way,
I
implemented
and,
in
particular,
I
implemented
a
doubly-linked
list
effectively
by
having
hash
tables
of
uu
ideas
where
I'm
like
constantly
like
you,
you
want
to
get
your
next
one.
A
You,
like
Anna,
look
up
the
CEO
idea
effectively
this
time,
stamping
it's
the
next
thing
and
I'm
like
this
is
terrible.
This
is
gonna
be
this
is
gonna
perform
abysmally
and
it
outperformed
my
safe.
It's
like
hell
and
so
I'm,
like
I
gotta.
Take
that
apart
what
actually
happened?
What
actually
happened
is,
and
it
gets
right
to
the
composability
of
rust.
A
What
actually
happened
is
this
particular
code
spends
all
of
its
time,
searching
in
a
data
structure
I
in
a
sorted
data
structure
which,
in
my
C
implementation,
was
an
AVL
tree
for
a
lot
of
good
reasons.
We
use
trees
all
over
the
place
because
they're
super
easy
to
use.
You
can
embed
an
AVL
node
and
your
broader
C
structure.
You
can
have
a
given
C
structure,
that's
on
15
different
AVL
trees.
A
At
the
same
time,
by
embedding
different
AVL
nodes,
we've
got
a
library
that
gets
it
right
and
you
know,
and
so
on
and
so
forth.
So
it's
it
there's
a
lot
of
good
reasons.
Do
it,
but
an
AVO
tree
is
actually
not
it's
good,
but
it's
not
the
best
data
structure
to
use
and,
in
particular,
rust
uses,
B
trees
and
B
trays.
A
Yes
from
databases,
rust
implants,
data
structures,
you
just
a
it's
binary
tree
structure
is
a
b-tree
and
it
turns
out
it
in
this
era,
in
the
memory
hierarchy
being
what
it
is,
cache
line,
sizes
being
what
they
are
a
beech
tree
is
actually
a
better
implementation
and
the
implementation
for
B
trees
and
rust
is
total
rocket
science
and
there's
some
great
blog
entries
describing
the
the
kind
of
the
iteration
on
that.
But
it's
amazing
stuff.
A
So
a
lot
of
this
is
a
lot
of
the
performance
Delta
here,
and
this
is
the
this
is
run
time
on
the
on
the
y
axis
and
the
the
rectangles
kind
of
varies.
This
data
set
saw
has
effectively
for
this
particular
application
on
a
lot
of
the
win,
on
the
one
hand,
was
beat
race
and
easy
music.
Well,
that's
just
like
that's
be
trees,
not
trees.
A
It's
like
yeah,
but
the
reason
I
could
use
a
be
tree
and
not
an
AVL
tree
is
because
that
composability
of
rust,
like
a
be
tree
and
C,
is
gnarly
and
because
a
be
tree
in
like
is
just
I,
can't
talk
about
intrusive,
it's
very
intrusive,
it's
very
kind
of
up
and
everything's
underwear
and
the
and
someone,
of
course
the
inner
is
like
why
you're
going
to
use
this
be
tree
implementation.
You
look
at
the
bee
tree.
A
Imitations
like
this
is
rocky,
and
if
this
thing
has,
if
there's
a
memory,
corruption
issue
in
here,
I
do
not
want
to
have
to
go,
find
it.
So
it's
the
it
I
would
still
use
an
AVL
tree
and
see
even
though
I
know
I'm
giving
up
some
small
amount
of
performance,
but
in
Rus
I
get
to
use
a
bee
tree,
which
is
really
amazing.
Now
beyond
ownership.
A
There
are
tons
of
features
in
rust
that
I
love,
algebraic
types,
allow
for
amazing
error
handling,
so
algebraic
types
say
you
know
this
is
a
thing
that
can
be
this
or
that
or
this
other
thing.
It's
only
one
of
these
things.
It's
a
basically
a
union,
but
a
C
Union,
but
with
really
first-class
support,
and
the
great
thing
about
rust
is
if
you
return
a
result
that,
if
that
that
is
one
of
these
things,
you
need
to
figure
out
which
one
of
these
things
it
is
is.
This
is
an
error.
A
Is
that
it
is
this
an
actual
thing
that
I
can
unwrap,
and
it's
beautiful
ruin
resulting
in
terrific
error
handling,
go
into
more
details,
not
now,
but
you
can
find
that
online
as
a
terrific
chapter
arm
in
in
the
book
on
on
error,
handling
on
hygienic
macros
I,
so
didn't
have
hygienic
macros
in
see
that
I
I
kid
you
not
I
did
not
know
how
to
spell
hygienic
until
I
wrote.
A
blog
entry
on
this,
like
two
months
ago,
like
I
literally,
did
not
know
how
to
spell
hygienic
as
a
C
programmer.
A
It's
like
that
extra
I.
What's
that?
Do
it
in
there,
but
the
hygienic
macros
do
they
say
macros
that
can
actually
get
into
the
abstract
syntax
tree
or
a
first-class
primitive
in
rust,
and
it's
amazing
you
can
do
crazy,
powerful
stuff
in
macros,
crazy,
powerful,
safe
stuff
in
macros,
the
the
foreign
function
interface,
which
is
so
difficult
with
GC
languages
right
with
GC
a
point
I
made
earlier.
We
talked
about
GC
languages.
A
A
This
term
I'm
sure
there's
a
better
one
out
there
full
duplex
integration
and
that
you
can
take
C
and
drop
it
into
rust
or
rust
and
drop
it
into
C,
and
that
is
really
interesting
and
there's
a
lot
of
I'd,
say
community
interest
in
that
and
one
of
the
ulsan.
The
neat
thing
for
rust
is
that
there's
an
unsafe
keyword
that
you
can
use
for
unsafe
operation.
It's
not
arbitrary
operation.
A
It's
a
terrific
community,
stiphu
community
view
out
the
room
and
I
didn't
mean
to
imply
that
it's
only
to
give
you
your
other,
but
the
the
Russ
community
is
actually
really
amazing.
So
if
you
are
in
and
I
go
to
the
point
where,
like
open
source
communities,
just
kind
of
give
me
a
throbbing
headache
because
it
can
be
really
difficult
to
accommodate,
you
know
such
diverse
opinions
and
everything
else
and
I.
Don't
necessarily
you
know
it's
it.
That
is
saying
less
difficult
in
rust,
but
I
think
that
the
the
values
of
rust
tend
to
drive.
A
Conversations
that
there
are
is
it
feels
like
there's
a
keel
in
the
water
I
mean
it's
still
the
Internet
so,
of
course
like
it's
still
like
they're
still
bad
everything
else,
but
the
but
but
it
just
is.
It
feels
so
much
more
constructive
because
the
values
for
rust
are
so
clear,
so
I
really
know,
there's
a
lot
of
value
to
it,
so
okay
operating
system
in
rust.
A
Finally,
the
main
event
so
for
I
would
say,
first
of
all,
if
the
history
of
OS
development
teaches
us
anything,
it's
that
the
runtime
characteristics
of
an
operating
system
trump
its
development
time.
Nobody
cares
how
long
it
took
you
to
develop
it
and
that
it
was
easy
to
develop
or
hard
to
develop.
It's
like.
No
one
cares
they
care
if
it
works
in
a
care
of
fastest.
A
That's
the
care
back
and
when
I
say
day
I
mean
you,
that's
what
you
care
about
you
who
do
not
develop
hours
kernels,
and
so
you
should
care
about
it's
like
that's
what
we
want.
We
wanted
to
be
fast,
I
want
to
be
correct,
and
if
it
was
easy,
even
n
nimble
man
great
if
it
was
harder
than
the
new
one.
Well,
okay,
is
it
fast
and
correct?
A
Yes,
it's
fast
and
direct
like
well:
okay,
that's
someone
else's
problem
and
that's
fine,
but
we
have
to
understand
that
those
are
the
load
stars,
so
we
can't
actually
throw
those
things
out
if
we're
gonna
reemployment
an
LS
and
Rost,
and
we
have
remember
that
structured
languages
replace
assembly
because
they
perform
as
well.
They
hadn't
performed
as
well.
They
would
not
have
replaced
them
and
every
operating
system
has
assembly
somewhere
in
it
but
with
but
with
rust
and
I.
A
Do
think
that
it's
important
to
realize
that
rust
does
represent
a
new
opportunity
that
we
have
not
had
in
30
years
more,
which
is
a
new
programming
language
that
actually
is
a
candidate
this
stuff.
So
a
first,
the
first
time
that
I'm
aware
of
is
Alex
lights
Redux.
This
was
a
teaching
operating
system
called
winix
that
was
reimplemented
in
rust.
As
an
undergrad
thesis,
the
under-bed
thesis
itself
is
a
great
read
where
Alex
goes
into
a
bunch
of
the
challenges
that
he
ran
into
as
he
implemented
this.
A
The
biggest
challenge
was
that
rust
then
did
not
allow
for
any
allocation
failure.
So
if
all
allocations
effectively
block
work
or
death,
like
we
all
like
why
live,
lets
us
all
blow
or
blow
ourselves
up,
which
is
fine,
I
mean
I,
get
that's,
actually
not
necessarily
a
bad
attitude,
especially
musicland,
but
in
the
operating
system
we
can't
do
in
the
operating
system.
We
need
to
be
able
to
know
if
this
allocation
is
not
gonna
work
and
if
we
are
out
of
memory,
I
need
to
go.
Do
some
work
to
free
up
memory,
it's
like!
A
Well,
how
are
you
can
you
for
like
how
can
an
application,
possibly
for
your
memory?
It's
like
well,
this
application
is
the
operating
system,
so
we've
got
ways
of
free
I'm.
Every
we
I
I
will
throw
out
dead
processes
until
we've
got
memory
freed
up,
which
we
don't
want
to
do.
I
mean
I'd,
be.
This
is
a
definitely
point
of
divergence
between
Linux
in
other
kernels.
It's
like.
A
We
actually
don't
want
to
throw
out
dead
processes,
but
there
are
lots
of
things
that
we
can
go
do
to
free
up
memory
in
the
system,
because
we
control
all
the
memory
in
the
system.
So
it's
very
hard
to
run
a
modern
operating
system.
We
smart
OS
because
it's
very
hard
to
run
smart
notes
out
of
memory
on
we,
but
we
have
to
be
able
to
still
potentially
fail
allocations
in
some
isolated
cases.
So
one
things
we
did
in
the
kernel
a
long
time
ago
is:
we
introduced
the
notion
of
sleeping
allocations.
A
Most
allocations
are
sleeping
allocations
that
can't
fail.
Some
allocations
are
no
sleeping
allocations,
which
means
they
don't
have
that
they
can
accommodate
failure
and
we
need
the
ability
to
implement
something
like
that.
This
is
an
area
that
is
was
made
much
better
with
the
addition
of
global
allocators,
which
was
added.
I
was
like
127,
something
like
that
once
a
six
month,
but
the
dealing
with
memory
allocation
failure
is
still
a
very
much
an
active
issue
and
unsettled
the
area
for
rust.
I
would
check
out
on
the
RV
RFC
number
that
you
can
check
out
there.
A
These
RFC's,
if
you
do
real
rust
development,
you're
gonna
end
up
in
the
RFC's
pretty
quickly
as
you
go
to
understand,
because
things
are
new
enough,
that
you're
gonna
be
even
if
you're,
using
things
that
are
there.
You're
gonna
inevitably
come
back.
The
design
discussions
on
I
and
those
design
sessions
can
be
really
interesting
and
actually
uplifting,
and
one
of
the
things
that
the
the
way
rust
does.
A
Raw
literals,
for
example,
which
is
with
are
the
character,
are
a
pound
sign
or
an
octave
Thorpe
or
a
hash
tag
depending
what
generation
you
are,
which
I
swear?
It's
a
hash
tag,
but
now,
like
my
kids,
always
say
hash
tag
of
everything.
So
it's
like
it's
not
a
hash
tag.
It's
a
pound,
sign
whatever
be
our
and
then
hash
tag,
whatever
I
sum
number
of
hash
tags
and
then
your
literal
and
then
the
same
number
of
hashtags
as
open
little.
A
But
just
looking
at
that
discussions
a
really
interesting
discussion,
because
everyone's
talking
about
how
all
these
different
systems
do
it
and
actually
the
absence
of
raw
string,
literals
problem
for
me
in
JavaScript
and
in
situ
as
well,
and
it's
actually
it's
a
many
many
things
of
a
love
and
rust,
but
that
design
discussions
were
interesting.
Email.
It's
a
super
small
issue.
These
RFC's
will
get
you
into
those
design
discussions.
This
particular
area
is
an
area.
A
That's
still
unsettled,
with
respect
to
allocation
failure,
but
is
settled
with
respect
to
global
allocators
which
actually
allow
you
a
lot
of
it.
Since
2015,
there
have
been
a
there's,
been
this
a
kind
of
explosion
of
little
operating
systems
in
rust.
If
I
forgot
yours,
I'm
really
sorry
I
tried
to
get
them
all.
I
try
to
get
the
ones
that
still
compile.
So
you
got
redox
just
kind
of
the
big
one,
then
TIFF
'ln
and
talk
and
Intermezzo
sand,
rust,
OS
and
quilt
OS
rocks
and
then
philip
opens
blog
OS,
philip
Oberman.
A
Please
give
this
thing
a
name
call
it
whatever
you
want.
You
get
to
name
something.
It's
like
important
enough
to
name
it.
I,
don't
want
to
have
to
call
it
philip
opens
blog
OS,
so
just
give
it
an
ever
name.
It's
a
great
thing
you're
doing
right.
Please
give
it
a
different
name.
If
blog
OS
I,
guess
that's
what
it
is
so
on.
A
Some
of
them
are
teaching
systems,
Intermezzo
blog
OS,
somewhere
unit
kernels,
like
quilt,
OS,
that
all
that
only
are
going
to
allow
for
rust
programs,
the
kind
of
limited
in
regard
some
targeted
IOT
like
talk
on
the
the
attribute
that
all
these
systems
have
in
common
is
they
are
all
Denova.
They
are
all
written
from
scratch,
which
is
great
on
the
one
hand,
because
it's
rust
allows
us
to
explore
these
new
ideas
and
build
these
operating
systems,
and
all
these
efforts
should
be
encouraged
and
especially
the
teaching
ones.
A
All
terrific
it's
great
to
butts
on
that
one
is.
It
means
that
you're
forsaking
Linux
binary
compatibility
and
that
just
means
that
a
lot
of
the
world
software's
not
going
to
work
and
which
is
fine,
I
mean
I
honor
that
I've
experimented
with
that
approach
for
many
years
I.
For
me,
it
doesn't
work,
but
you
know
it's
I
like
having
the
world
software
work
and
I
say
that
as
a
UNIX
operating
system,
that's
very,
very,
very,
very,
very
close
to
Linux
I'm
serious,
but
like
no.
A
No,
so
so,
we've
done
all
sorts
of
things
to
allow
for
Linux
final
cut
out
ability
just
to
talk
about
some
of
those.
In
his
talk
that
Linux
binary
compatibility
is
a
really
long
tail.
It's
really
brutal
it's
very
hard
to
do.
You
end
up
in
a
lot
of
really
ugly
gray
areas
and
the
you
know,
Friedan's
talk
for
some
of
the
gray
areas
that
they
ran
into
and
we've
run
into
a
bunch
so
that
you
get
all
those
problems
which
you
don't
want
to
have
to
go
resolve
you
don't
have
to
deal
with.
A
V4
can
sick
child
semantics
cross
like
be
Forex,
semantics,
terrible,
sick
child
semantics,
terrible
v4
plus
sake,
child
semantics,
like
unspeakable
semantics,
Superfund
site
that
no
one
should
have
to
deal
with
on,
and
they
also
means
that
they
are
all
fighting
second
system
syndrome.
They
are
all
fighting
like
well
as
long
as
like
the
train
is
leaving.
A
Let's
get
let's
back
up
the
truck
and
let's
do
a
new
file
system,
let's
do
a
new
way
of
thinking
about
devices
and
let's,
and
that
can
be
really
productive
and
interesting,
but
that
can
also
be
paralyzing
so
that
that's
that's
a
challenge.
The
it's
also
a
challenge
like
what
is
the
advantage
of
rewriting
things
that
are
actually
working
code
in
rust
and
I.
You
know,
I,
don't
know,
because
the
safety
argument
just
doesn't
carry
as
much
weight
for
kernel
developers,
not
because
the
safety
argument
isn't
really
really
important.
A
It's
just
because,
like
it's
safe
because
when
it's
not
safe,
like
it
blows
up
and
everyone
gets
really
upset,
we
figure
out
why
and
we
fix
it,
and
we
develop
a
lot
of
great
tooling
to
not
have
these
problems,
so
it
has
to
have
more
of
a
grab
than
just
the
safety.
The
performance
is
great.
There
are
things
that
are
bad,
that
are
great,
but
this
is
working
code
that
we
want
to
replace
like.
Why?
Don't
one
other
place?
That's
working
code,
especially
with
respect
to
the
kernel
which
has
multiplied
own
data
structures
everywhere.
A
Everything
is
on
many
lists.
I
mean
there
are
things
that
are
where
you've
got
these
nice
kind
of
like
hierarchies
of
objects,
but
most
things
don't
actually
have
that
and
yes,
some
of
those
are
semantic
sewers
and
should
be
re-implemented
some
of
them.
There
are
some
endemic
problems
and
you
look
at
like
thread
dispatch
and
so
on.
There
are
some
endemic
problems
and
they're
like
okay.
Well,
we're
just
gonna
walk
around
this
with
unsafe,
like
okay,
but
like
every
time
you
use
an
unsafe
and
your
rust
operating
system.
A
It's
like
you're
losing
a
little
bit
of
the
advantage
of
rust,
but
you
know
whatever
so
I
think
an
OS
kernel,
despite
you
know
the
historic
appeal
and
the
superficial
fit
I,
don't
know
that!
That's
worth
it
I,
don't
know.
That's
that's
the
good!
That's
the
right!
First
approach,
I
mean
again.
These
other
operating
system
should
be
encouraged.
I
think
it's
great,
but
I
think
for
the
OS.
Is
that
we're
gonna
use
for
the
rest
of
our
lives?
A
I'm,
not
sure
that
that's
a
good
right
first
approach,
maybe
we'll
get
there
eventually
I,
don't
want
to
rewrite
CFS
and
rust.
That's
opposed
down
to
like
I
wake
up
in
a
cold,
sweat
when
I
think
what
were
you
writing,
ZFS
and
rust,
and
go
to
like
well
go
look
at
the
CIO
pipeline
and
tell
me
you
want
to
rewrite
that
thing
in
rust.
It's
just
like
no
thank
you.
A
A
So
one
hybrid
approach
is
that
you
retain
your
existing
C
assembly
based
Carl,
the
way
we
we
have
had
for
many
years,
and
then
you
allow
for
rust,
based
things
to
be
developed,
rust
based
drivers,
rust
based
file
systems
rust
base
in
Carl
software,
where
the
points
that
estimated
in
his
talk
was
that
we
want
to
have
more
in
colonel
software.
Well,
this
is
a
safe
way
of
doing
it.
Now.
Maybe
the
safety
argument
is
a
big
win,
because
now
it's
like
hey
more
people
can
safely
develop.
A
The
colonel
towed
yes,
fine,
existing
kernel
developers
are
not
gonna,
write
the
kernel
but
having
a
safe,
rust
sandbox
inside
the
kernel.
That
might
be
interesting.
It
would
allow
for
an
incremental
approach
which
I
think
like
let's
take
that
UNIX
BC
approach
and
it
allows
for
us
to
be
used
for
new
development
where
you're
not
trying
to
kind
of
port
existing
C
structure
and
being
burdened
by
the
C
implementation.
There's
a
prototype
of
that's
a
freebsd,
others
are
possible.
A
I
think
we
definitely
wonder
this
in
smart
of
us
at
some
point
on
a
hybrid
programmer
to
rust,
osq
modes
and
operates.
Ism
is
not
just
the
girl
there's
a
lot
of
other
stuff
out
there.
There
is
utilities,
daemons
service
management
device,
Penta
default
management,
the
debuggers,
etc.
Yes,
system
B
is
a
part
of
your
operating
system,
whether
you
acknowledge
it
or
not.
System
B
is
you
know.
You've
got
these
things
that
are
part
of
the
operating
system.
A
These
things
are
great
candidates,
frog,
if
you
were
writing
system
D,
now,
no
question
that
it's
in
rust,
you're
speaking
for
us.
If
we're
writing
SMF
now
no
question
in
my
mind
that
that's
in
rust
that
is
like
and
in
part
because
by
the
way
like,
let
me
tell
you
something
that
most
kernel
developers
won't
tell
you
it's
harder
to
write
user
level
software,
it's
hard
to
write,
use
available
software
because
more
can
go
wrong
like
do
a
problem
that
I
never
have
in
the
kernel
a
configuration
file
that
someone
deleted
all
right.
A
This
is
not
the
way
we
roll
in
the
kernel
like
we
don't
have
that
like
the
configuration
file.
Is
the
girl
like
if
you
deleted
me
I'm,
not
here,
it's
not
my
problem.
Like
you
can't
boot
anything
I
mean
I,
got
lots
of
other
problems.
I
got
like
I
got
a
boot
this
thing
and
then
I
got
like
Intel.
Interesting
vulnerabilities
left
her
and
said
odds
on
the
problem.
I
have
plenty
of
problems,
but
I
don't
have
the
problems.
I,
don't
have
distribute
systems
problems.
I,
don't
have
these
kind
of
operation
failures.
A
There
were
a
lot
of
feelers
that
aren't
have
and
that's
the
stuff
that
Russ
is
really
good
at.
So
that
might
be
a
really
good
candidate
for
lost,
so
I
think
a
lot
of
those
are
especially
the
OS
expands
to
beyond
just
an
operating
system
and
consists
of
entire
crowd
control
plane
and
then
the
the
third
approach,
one
that
I'm
excited
about
at
the
moment,
is
you
know,
there's
there
is
another
operating
system
out
there,
an
operating
system
that
hasn't
advanced
technologically
as
much
or
at
all.
A
That's
basically
still
running
glorified
Dass,
but
it's
running
all
of
humanity
on
top
of
it,
and
that
is
that
this
absolute
sewer
of
unobservable
system,
critical
mission,
critical
software
called
firmware
and
firmware,
has
lots
of
problems
as
I've
been
as
I'm
fond
of
saying
like
it
is,
it
is
humanity
versus
firmware,
and
everyone
needs
to
pick
a
side
and
I.
Think
that
that
you
look
at
some
of
the
challenges
of
firmware.
I
was
like
oh
man,
that
is
that's
a
good
fit
for
rust.
A
A
It
means
like
it's
a
smaller
kind
of
a
thing,
and
so
when
I
look
at
like
open,
BMC
I
view
open
BMC
as
on
its
knees
with
tears
streaming
down
its
face
begging
for
someone
to
please
rewrite
me
and
rust,
because
if
you're,
if
we're
going
to
have
the
the
BMC,
that's
gonna
hang
out
a
socket
over
the
internet,
god
forbid
or
even
over
the
network.
I
want
that
thing
to
be
in
Ross.
I!
Don't
want
that
to
be
in
C++
and
there's
a
lot
of
stuff
like
that.
A
So
I
think
that
is
where
I
want
to
see
the
world
right
now.
Firmware
is
the
proprietary
software
that
we're
all
forced
to
run.
I
want
to
see
a
world
we
get
to
open,
firmware
and
I
want
to
see
a
lot
of
that
written
in
rust,
because
it's
a
much
much
much
better
foundation
for
Humanity
move
the
humanity,
a
huge
favor.
So
looking
forward,
I
mean
I'm
very
bullish
on
rust,
I'm
very
excited
about
rust.
It's
something
we
really
haven't
seen
in
a
long
time.
It's
a
true
alternative.
A
We
can
use
it
deep
in
the
stack
I
think
it
is
I
think
we
can
use
it
in
from
where
I
think
we
can
use
an
operating
systems.
I
just
think
that
that
practically
it's
going
to
be
really
really
hard,
but
I
think
we
can
definitely
use
it
in
the
way
we
extend
the
colonel
and
the
beauty
of
rust
is
that
it
allows
these
hybrid
approaches
that
the
beauty
of
rust
is
its
ability
to
interoperate
cooperate
with
native
systems
with
C
Bay
systems
allow
for
vistas
to
open
up
and
for
us
in
system
software.
A
The
no
no
I
don't
hate
I
first
off
I've,
never
felt
III
have
only
tried
to
bargain
with
a
borrow
checker
I
have
never,
even
when
it
is
absolutely
thrashing
me
I
know
it
is
out
of
its
own
love
for
what
it's
trying
to
do
and
and
I
think
actually,
with
with
rust.
It's
important
to
get
over
that
hump,
like
the
one
thing
I,
would
advise
if
you
have
not
implanted
rust,
please
for
the
love
of
God,
don't
start
with
a
doubly-linked
list.
A
In
fact,
I
wouldn't
start
like
it's
very
often
that
you
like
I've,
got
like
oh
I've,
got
like
the
sodoku
thing
or
I've
got
the
you
know
the
this
solver
or
that
thing
that
I've
written
plant
in
every
language,
I'm
gonna
go,
implement
it
and
Russ
to
try
it
on
precise.
Don't
do
that!
It's
a
bad
idea,
it's
a
just,
because
if
you
haven't
seen
what
the
borrowed
checker
can
do
for
you
the
first
time
it
begins
to
to
fight
with
you
for
lack
of
a
better
word,
for
something
tells
you
in
particular.
A
It
will
tell
you,
like,
hey
I,
think
you
want
to
make
that
mute.
Okay,
I'll
make
that
mute
and
I
go.
You
wanna
make
that
a
reference
like
we
gotta
make
that
around
you
know
if
you
doing
that,
every
reference
at
all-
oh
that
doesn't
work
at
all.
It's
like
I.
Just
didn't
you
told
me
to
do
it
now.
I've
got
like
so
many
more
errors,
but
and
that's
when
the
tears
begin
to
wail
up.
Don't
do
that
and
one
of
the
things
that
I
did
that
I
would
recommend
is
so
they're.
A
The
the
two
books
on
rust
are
terrific.
There's
you
guys
call
it
triple.
I
call
triple
or
turbo
turbo
line
the
Russ
programming
language,
so
steep,
ionic
and
Kelvin,
and
the
entire
community
wrote
that
which
is
great,
and
you
want
to
have
that
reference
and
then
the
other
one
is
what's
programming
in
rust,
but
programming,
rust
on
and
the
O'reilly
book
and
I
think
that
they
I
like
having
both
those
books
side
by
side.
One
of
these
I
really
like
a
program
in
rust.
A
There
is
a
fully
worked
example
and
I
just
like
type
that
in
when
I
first
got
into
Ross,
like
I.
Haven't
done
that
literally
since
enter
magazine
from
back
in
the
day,
I
got
a
feature
as
old
as
I
am
but
like
you're,
like
opening
up
the
back
of
inter
magazine
like
typing,
in
your
basic
on
the
c64
or
whatever.
It
was
really
valuable
to
do
that,
because
you'd
have
typos
and
then
you'd
fix
them,
but
they'd
all
be
very
gentle
typos,
and
you
know
that
you've
got
something.
A
That's
correct
and
by
the
time,
even
I
gotten
through
that
simple
exercise.
I'm
like
okay,
I
see
the
value
so
in
the
borrowed.
Checker
began
to
torment
me
I'm,
like
I
know.
This
is
out
of
love
and
not
hate,
because
it
can
feel
confusing.
Other
systems
don't
have
ownership,
and
this
is
a
novel
thing
about
the
system.
A
I
think
the
community
does
a
great
job
doing
this,
but
just
to
emphasize
this
with
rust,
you
need
to
learn
it
and
if
you
are
of
the
age
where
you're
learning
lots
of
stuff
that's
easy
and
if
you're
of
my
age,
where
it's
like
I've,
been
able
to
kind
of
like
wing
it
by
just
like
pounding
stuff
out
for
a
while,
it's
like
I
need
to
go
back
in
time
and
actually
buy
the
book.
Sit
down.
Read
the
book
in
a
quiet
place,
really
understand
it.
A
A
So
I'm
a
late
comer,
so
ie
for
me.
Yes,
because
I
haven't
lived
in
this
kind
of
tortured
past,
where
I
think
there
are
people
that
use
rusts
two
years
ago,
we're
like
oh,
my
god,
never
again,
and
because
they
you
know
we
had
the
wearer
because
they'd
it
was
early
for
me,
it's
been
great
and
it
performs
well.
It
generates
I
think
the
incremental
compilers
incremental
support
added
early
this
year
so
like
that
sound
that
long
ago,
like
to
me,
that's
always
been
there.
So
it's
like
you
know
like.
A
Why
is
everyone
complain
about
the
compile
times
of
rust
like
this
is
great
it's
like
because,
like
just
before
you
showed
up,
it
was
a
serious
problem.
That's
why
I
was
so
things
like
that,
like
rust
is
really
solidifying.
I
think
quickly
to
me,
I
would
not
hesitate
to
use
it
for
production
software
in
the
hills,
because
I'm
making
a
very
recent
past,
but
you
know
whatever
I
think
it's
ready.
Yes,.
A
Sure
I
mean
I
think
that
there
is
been
and
I'll
tell
you.
A
couple
of
the
benefits
will
be
that
the
this
is
a
I.
Think
Russ
is
a
big
deal
for
system
software
and
I.
Think
waiting
for
another
year
is
going
to
give
you
that
many
more
resources
to
learn
from
it's
gonna
be
the
documentation,
is
gonna.
Be
that
much
better.
The
crates
are
gonna,
be
that
much
better
you're
gonna.
Be
that
much
less
likely
to
get
it
into
the
rfcs
I
mean
you're.
A
Gonna
have
non
lexical
lifetimes
in
a
year
right:
okay,
December,
6th,
December
6th,
perhaps
of
2025,
but
but
you're
gonna,
and
if
you
use
rust
after
non
lexical
lifetimes
integrates
you're,
not
even
gonna
realize
what
the
fuss
was
about.
Borrowing
Jackie
look:
why
does
everyone
like
you,
my
another
project?
I've,
never
had
a
problems
like
because
you
right
now,
I'm
rust
really
only
uses
lexical
lifetimes
and
there
are
times
they're
like
no
seriously
rust.
I
swear
I'm
done
with
us
like
look
like
we'll
get
the
code
with
me,
trust
compile
like
we're
done
with
it.
A
A
Right,
if
that
can
make
a
big
difference
they
and
because
again
that's
gonna,
make
a
difference
that
you
literally
won't
even
be
aware
of.
You
will
just
not
understand
what
the
fuss
was
about
bought
the
bar
checker
I
think
I'm
a
nerd.
If
you
guys
hear
that,
but
I
think
I
think
it's
gonna
make
a
big
big,
big,
big
difference
right
so
and
and
but
and
gives
you
high
quality,
high
quality,
artifacts
and
everything
else.
So
yeah
I
think
there's,
there's
I
mean
this
is
not
like
hey
hey.
A
Do
this
I
mean
I
honestly,
think
Russ
is
gonna,
be
around
forever.
I
really
do
I
think
this
is
like
you.
The
this
is
the
formation
of
ancient
Greek,
so
I
mean
there's
no
rush.
You've
got
thousands
of
years,
I
mean
there's
no,
like
you
know,
take
your
time
and
there
anyway,
it
is
gonna
get
better,
but
I
also
think
if
you've
been
waiting,
because
things
are
too
crazy,
you
you
don't
need
to
wait
that
much
longer
or
don't
even
wait
at
all
all
right
with
that
I
think
we're
done.
Thank
you
very
much.
Justin.