Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by SEJeff 1952 days ago
This I entirely agree with you on but I’d expect it due to the resources available at the time were more fluent with C than rust. A shame really.
1 comments

Or they want to be more platform-agnostic than rust and llvm.
Which platforms does Red Hat support Linux containers on that Rust doesn't support? Which platforms is anyone else frequently using Linux containers on that Rust doesn't support? I'm pretty sure the venn diagram here would be a single circle. Rust supports the major architectures.

Portability seems like an unlikely reason here, but I would pick memory safety over portability every single day of the week. Rust is far from the only language that offers memory safety, but it is certainly one of the most compelling ones for projects that would otherwise be written in C.

"runc" is battle tested, written almost entirely in Go, which offers memory safety, and the performance delta under discussion is only about 2x for a part of the system that seemingly only has a measurable performance impact if you're starting containers as quickly as possible.

This just isn't a very compelling use case for C.

Who knows? Who cares?

If I worked for RedHat I would still seek to write as portable as possible just on general principle or for the sake of my own future self.

But I agree it's merely a possible reason and may not be a major one.