[coldtea]

>Because it's an easy indicator of someone who has no idea what they're doing in OS development.

Actually suggesting Rust as some kind of magic bullet over C/C++ is a huge indicator "of someone who has no idea what they're doing in OS development".

It's similar to when first year CS students learn that assembly is "faster" (a hazy notion itself), and then want everything to be written in assembly.

[jrimbault]

>It's similar to when first year CS students learn that assembly is "faster" (a hazy notion itself), and then want everything to be written in assembly.

That's an interesting kind of first year students... The kind I know flee before anything lower than C++.

[Sir_Cmpwn]

Added to my comment:

>Edit: I should clarify that I think C is the only rational choice and that Rust is ill suited to osdev as well. I'm only talking about C++ here.