

        <cite>Jane Losare-Lusby</cite>
      <time>0:00</time>
      <p>
          Right   now,   the   prevailing   attitude   is   more   aligned   with   your   attitude,   which   is   like   all   the   programming   languages,   like   there&#39;s   not   one   right   way   to   do   things   that   all   the   programming   languages   have   value,   and   we   should   all   be   learning   from   each   other.
      </p>

        <cite>Conor</cite>
      <time>0:21</time>
      <p>
          Welcome   to   ADSP   the   podcast,   episode   107,   recorded   on   November   2nd,   2022.   My   name   is   Connor,   and   today   with   my   co-host   Bryce,   we   continue   part   two   of   our   conversation   with   Jane   Lazari   Lesby   on   the   Rust   programming   language.   Be   sure   to   check   out   part   one,   link   in   the   description   if   you   haven&#39;t   yet.
      </p>

        <cite>Jane Losare-Lusby</cite>
      <time>0:49</time>
      <p>
          And   so   into   iter,   like   you   went   with   a   vec,   you   can   take   a   reference   to   a   vec   and   call   and   like   put   that   in   parentheses.   And   like   so   ampersand,   vec   variable   identifier,   parentheses,   dot   into   iter,   and   that   will   do   the   reference   to   into   iter   like   trait   implementation.   So   it&#39;s   like   for   like   a   reference   to   any   type   that   implements   into   iter   will   do,   or   I   think   it   might   actually   be   a   direct   implementation   on   reference   to   vec.   I&#39;m   not   positive   on   that   one.   Um   whereas   iter   is   just   a   free   function   associated   with   the   vec   or   possibly   the   slice   type   that   will   just   basically   do   the   exact   same   thing   that   or   if   you   like   were   to   give   it   a   reference   in   front   of   it   when   you   call   the   into   iter,   it&#39;s   going   to   give   you   a   like   iterating   over   references   iterator.   Whereas   you   call   iter,   it&#39;s   always   gonna   just   do   the   iterating   through   references   iterator.   And   so   calling   iter   is   useful   in   situations   where   you   don&#39;t   want   to   have   to   deal   with   like   adding   that   reference   at   a   time.   You   just   want   the   auto   ref   to   like   handle   getting   through   going   through   the   slice   or   dereferencing   or   whatever   is   necessary   because   it   like   it   knows   the   exact   type   it&#39;s   gonna   be   resolving   to,   versus   into   iter,   it&#39;s   a   generic   receiver.   And   so   it   can&#39;t   you   could   write   run   into   inference   errors   sometimes   or   you   might   or   might   end   up   like   iterating   by   owner,   like   owned   values   or   something.   Um,   and   like   intuitive   is   more   flexible   in   that   like   you   can   have   like   owned   iteration   or   non-owned   iteration,   and   it&#39;s   actually   implicitly   called   in   for   loops.   So   when   you   put   when   you   add   the   iterable   item   to   the   like   the   the   second   expression   in   the   for   loop.   So   you   have   four   variable   identifier   in   expression,   um,   that   is   expected   to   be   a   type   that   implements   into   iter.   And   iterators,   like   the   iterator   trait   is   like   reflexively   implemented   for   intuitors.   So   if   you   give   it   an   iterable   type,   it   just   automatically   is   itself.   Um   I   guess   that&#39;s   an   identity   conversion.   Um   and   but   like   if   you   were   to   just   give   it   a   vec   with   behind   a   reference,   like   a   variable   named   the   to   the   vec   behind   with   an   ampersand   in   front   of   it,   then   it   will   iterate   by   reference.   If   you   did   a   mutable   reference   in   front   of   that   vec,   it   would   iterate   by   mutable   reference.   If   you   just   did   the   vec   itself,   it   will   take   the   vec   by   like   owned   value,   take   it   apart,   and   iterate   by   value   and   destroy   the   original   vec   in   the   process.   And   it&#39;s   like   all   you   have   to   do   is   like   what   reference   you   put   in   front   of   that   variable   determines   how   it   gets   iterated   by   the   into   iter   trait.
      </p>

        <cite>Conor</cite>
      <time>3:19</time>
      <p>
          Interesting.   Yeah,   that   makes   sense   because   I   think   one   of   the   times   that   um   Clippy   modified   it   from   an   into   iter   to   iter   was   when   I   was   using   the   Windows   function,   which   I   think   was   returning   slices   or   something   like   that.   So   that   makes   sense   then   because   it   was   potentially   uh   unnecessary   what   I   was   doing   there.   Cool.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>3:41</time>
      <p>
          I   have   a   question   now.   How   do   you   um   how   do   you   write   um   traits   in   Rust?   Like   how   do   you   express   a   constraint?   The   the   way   that   it&#39;s   done   in   C   ⁇   I   find   very   um   quirky.   So   in   C   ⁇   you   it&#39;s   done   essentially   through   these   like   usage   patterns   where   you   um   uh   you   say   like,   oh,   suppose   I   have   a   um   an   object   X   of   this   type   that   I&#39;m   constraining,   and   then   uh   you   have   to   be   able   to   be   able   to   call   you   know   this   thing   on   X   and   then   that   thing   on   X,   and   if   you   call   this   thing   on   X,   it   returns   this   type.   Um   so   what&#39;s   it   like   in   in   Rust?   How   do   I   how   do   I   describe   a   trait   in   Rust?
      </p>

        <cite>Jane Losare-Lusby</cite>
      <time>4:26</time>
      <p>
          So   it&#39;s   I   can&#39;t   remember   like   the   like   the   formal   terms,   but   like   basically   instead   of   describing   what   the   type   needs   to   conform   to,   you   it&#39;s   it&#39;s   kind   of   like   an   abstract   class   sort   of   thing.   Like   you&#39;re   describing   the   interface.   Yes,   and   when   you   implement   it,   you   implement   that   interface   within   the   impl   block   of   the   trait.   So   for   like   normally,   if   you&#39;re   if   you&#39;re   defining   like   a   free   function   for   a   type,   you   like   have   open   up   a   block   that&#39;s   like   impul   type   and   then   open   but   open   block.   And   within   that   is   where   your   functions   go,   and   then   you   have   you   can   like   have   a   self   as   one   of   your   parameters,   and   that&#39;s   gonna   refer   to   the   type   in   the   impl   block,   et   cetera,   et   cetera.   When   you&#39;re   doing   the   trait   function   implementations,   you&#39;re   gonna   do   impl   trait   for   type.   And   but   otherwise   it&#39;s   gonna   be   the   same   thing,   but   like   the   functions   in   there   are   going   to   be   only   the   functions   that   are   defined   in   the   trait.   You   can&#39;t   just   put   like   random   functions   in   there.   And   if   you   like   implement   that   exact   function   in   like   a   just   as   normal   input   block,   it   doesn&#39;t   get   associated   with   the   trait.   It   is   like   it   has   to   be   in   the   traits   input   block.   And   you   might   be   able   to   have   the   same   function   name   in   two   places   and   then   just   cause   like   fun   ambiguity   errors   where   you   have   to   like   specify   the   like   the   long   form   like   at   like   type   as   trait   colon   colon   function   name   or   something   like   that.   Um   pretty   sure   that   works,   but   not   recommended   most   of   the   time.   It&#39;s   probably   just   gonna   cause   problems.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>5:56</time>
      <p>
          So   that   that   that   that&#39;s   sort   of   how   I   want   to   be   able   to   write   concepts   in   C   ⁇ ,   but   can&#39;t.   And   there   were   proposals   at   some   point   in   the   history   of   uh   of   C   that   allowed   you   to   write   concepts   like   that,   but   um   they   went   away.   Um   uh   is   the   polite   and   simple   way   to   say   that.
      </p>

        <cite>Jane Losare-Lusby</cite>
      <time>6:17</time>
      <p>
          If   I   could   if   I   could   ask   a   question   about   C,   how&#39;s   the   pattern   matching   proposal   or   the   patterns   proposal   going?   I   know   there   was   like   some   work   there.
      </p>

        <cite>Conor</cite>
      <time>6:24</time>
      <p>
          It&#39;s   not   it&#39;s   not   C   29.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>6:29</time>
      <p>
          The   thing   is   that   a   lot   of   um   development   of   a   large   part   of   the   the   feature   set   of   C   has   stalled   because   the   the   um   the   C   committee   process   was   not   well   prepared   for   the   pandemic,   and   the   C   committee   um   admirable   attempts   were   made   to   adjust   to   the   new   world,   but   um   the   reality   is   that   a   lot   of   work   uh   stalled   out   um   over   the   past   two   years.   So   there&#39;s   a   proposal   that   two   years   ago   like   looked   like   it   was   on   track,   but   um   I   don&#39;t   have   I   don&#39;t   have   high   hopes   for   things   that   have   not   made   progress   in   the   past   two   years,   even   if   they   were   in   good   shape   two   years   ago,   because   um   disruptive.   It&#39;s   disruptive,   best   practices   can   change.   I   think   people   are   maybe   surprised   to   hear   that,   but   the   the   best   practices   you   know,   within   even   within   a   big   language   like   C   that   moves   slowly,   the   best   practices   do   evolve.   Um   like   we,   the   people   who   are   building   the   language,   we   learn   over   time,   um,   mostly   through   making   mistakes.   And   then   we&#39;re   like,   well,   you   know,   we   don&#39;t   want   to   do   that   again,   so   you   know,   we   should   do   this   instead.   And   so   the   best   practices   evolve,   and   then   the   more   time   that   your   thing   goes   without   being   updated,   the   further   and   further   away   it   is   from   the   state   of   the   art.   Um   and   uh   and   that   that   makes   it   harder   for   something   to   come   back   even   if   it   was   mature   before.   And   I   think   that   this   is   ultimately   what   happened   to   some   of   the   bigger   features   of   C   ⁇   and   recent   memory   that   have   um   that   have   stalled   out   or   that   the   committee   has   has   in   some   way   rejected.   Um   like   the   uh   the   the   networking   TS   is   is   one.   It   was   something   that   was   evolved   in   the   you   know   mid   2010s   and   uh   uh   we   published   a   TS   on   it   and   we   got   it   pretty   close   to   being   ready   to   go   into   the   standard.   Um   but   then   the   best   practices   you   know   changed   a   lot,   and   um   uh   then   there   was   resistance   to   uh   updating   it,   and   also   it   was   a   big   thing.   So   um,   you   know,   when   you&#39;ve   got   a   big   proposal   that   nobody   on   the   core   team   has   looked   at   in   two   years,   it&#39;s   gonna   take   a   while   for   everybody   to   get   familiar   with   the   thing   again.   Oh   yeah.   Um   and   then   that   means   that   it   takes   longer   to   get   started   working   on   it   again,   and   so   then   it   becomes   more   out   of   date,   and   it   just   it   if   you&#39;re   not   constantly   making   progress   on   a   thing,   uh   uh   it   it&#39;s   m   more   likely   than   not   gonna   become   abandoned.
      </p>

        <cite>Jane Losare-Lusby</cite>
      <time>9:11</time>
      <p>
          Yeah. Yeah,   no,   I   I   I   I   know   that   from   library   team   work,   like   it&#39;s   the   longer   the   gaps   between   reviews,   the   the   more   just   the   more   difficult   it   is   for   like   everyone   involved.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>9:22</time>
      <p>
          Well,   it&#39;s   it&#39;s   like   we   see   this   a   lot   um   with   like   software   updates,   like   uh   at   NVIDIA,   um   it&#39;s   been   a   a   um   a   struggle   over   the   years   for   me   to   get   um   various   internal   teams   and   SDKs   to   move   to   newer   compiler   versions   and   to   drop   older   compiler   versions.   Um   and   and   one   thing   that   we   repeatedly   see   is   that   the   um   if   you   update   from   you   know   upstream   once   a   month   um   versus   once   a   year,   um   you&#39;re   actually   doing   less   work   if   you&#39;re   doing   it   once   a   month.   You   might   think,   oh   well,   well,   we   update   once   a   year   and   like   you   know   it&#39;ll   be   12   times   as   much   work   um   than   updating   once   a   month,   but   it&#39;s   actually   probably   more   like   you   know   20   times   or   or   40   times   because   uh   the   the   the   cost   of   making   all   those   changes   um   uh   all   at   once   instead   of   doing   them   incrementally   is   far   greater.   Um   and   you   don&#39;t   really   um   you&#39;re   you&#39;re   not   able   to   start   making   changes   um   uh   uh   uh   sort   of   naturally   as   things   evolved.   You   end   up   in   the   situation   where   like,   oh   now   we   have   to   do   this   whole   big   refactor   to   update   to   the   newer   thing.   And   then,   you   know,   of   course,   that   takes   time,   and   then   that   means   that   it&#39;s   longer   until   you&#39;ve   updated   to   the   newer   thing,   then   there&#39;s   more   changes   that   you   have   to   deal   with,   and   again,   you   end   up   in   this   uh   death   spiral   of   uh   of   sadness.
      </p>

        <cite>Conor</cite>
      <time>10:59</time>
      <p>
          I   mean,   on   that   negative   note,   you   did   still   highlight   it   in   your   top   three.   Bryce   just   gave   a   keynote   a   week   ago   at   O3D   Con   in   Texas,   and   one   of   his   top   three   future   C   features   was   pattern   matching.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>11:15</time>
      <p>
          So   it&#39;s   good   stuff.   Those   top   three   features   that   I   highlighted   were   um   reflection,   um,   pattern   matching,   and   um   and   senders.   And   uh   I   mean   I   guess.
      </p>

        <cite>Jane Losare-Lusby</cite>
      <time>11:28</time>
      <p>
          Senders   like   channels?
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>11:29</time>
      <p>
          Yeah,   more   or   less,   yeah.   I&#39;m   I&#39;m   gonna   say   yeah,   and   there   are   a   bunch   of   people   who   I   work   with   who   um   may   be   upset   at   me,   but   yeah,   you   you   have   the   basic   idea.
      </p>

        <cite>Jane Losare-Lusby</cite>
      <time>11:42</time>
      <p>
          Okay.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>11:43</time>
      <p>
          Um   but   yeah,   I   mean   I   think   that   those   are   the   the   the   most   transformative   things   that   C   could   do   outside   of   um,   you   know,   ob   obviously   I   think   uh   the   the   whole   question   of   package   ecosystem   is   uh   probably   more   transformative.   I&#39;ve   said   for   like   a   while   that   the   most   single   most   important   thing   that   C   committee   could   do   is   to   figure   out   a   story   for   the   packaging   ecosystem.   Um   and   then   improving   the   C   committee   evolution   process.   Yeah   I   I   saw   something   on   Twitter   earlier   today   um   that   really   stuck   with   me,   which   was   something   in   the   effect   of   um   junior   engineers   think   about   how   are   we   gonna   solve   this   technical   problem?   How   are   we   gonna   do   this   thing?   How   are   we   gonna   execute   this   thing?   Um   whereas   senior   engineers   think   about   is   this   team   positioned   for   success?   Like,   do   they   have   the   support   that   they   need?   Are   they   are   they   um   uh   are   their   their   metrics   and   their   KPIs   set   up   in   a   way   that   they&#39;re   gonna   be   successful?   Um   are   they   happy,   etc.   Um   and   uh   that   really   ring   true   with   me.   Um   and   that&#39;s   one   of   the   reasons   why   I   care   so   much   about   the   um   the   the   health   and   the   um   that&#39;s   the   word   I&#39;m   looking   for   and   the   modernness   of   the   evolution   process   of   a   project.   Um   because   if   if   your   thing   can&#39;t   evolve   and   improve,   it   doesn&#39;t   matter   how   good   it   is,   eventually   other   things   that   can   evolve   and   improve   faster   will   outpace   it.   Yeah.
      </p>

        <cite>Jane Losare-Lusby</cite>
      <time>13:37</time>
      <p>
          Yeah.
      </p>

        <cite>Conor</cite>
      <time>13:37</time>
      <p>
          Yeah.   I   didn&#39;t   mean   I   didn&#39;t   even   when   I   was   listening   off   all   this   stuff,   I   didn&#39;t   even   mention,   yeah,   the   package   system   crates   crates.io.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>13:46</time>
      <p>
          Yeah.   Although   I   I   I   do   have   a   bone   to   pick   with   Rust   here.
      </p>

        <cite>Jane Losare-Lusby</cite>
      <time>13:50</time>
      <p>
          Oh.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>13:51</time>
      <p>
          Um   so   my   understanding   is   that   the   Rust   uh   uh   crate   system   is   uh   still   as   a   model   where   everything   is   built   from   source,   yes.
      </p>

        <cite>Jane Losare-Lusby</cite>
      <time>14:02</time>
      <p>
          Yes.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>14:02</time>
      <p>
          And   there&#39;s   no   binary   distribution.
      </p>

        <cite>Jane Losare-Lusby</cite>
      <time>14:06</time>
      <p>
          Uh   no,   but   they&#39;re   they&#39;re   they&#39;re   looking   at   starting   a   project   right   now   for   uh   uh   a   safe   ABI.   So   there&#39;s   like   an   like   we&#39;re   gonna   look   into   trying   to   find   a   way   to   have   a   subset   of   the   language   that   we   can   expose   as   like   a   stable   API   ABI   without   having   the   entire   like   Dyne   linked   ABI   be   stabilized.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>14:25</time>
      <p>
          Yeah.   So   so   my   my   my   bone   to   pick   here   is   essentially   um   I   don&#39;t   think   that   I   don&#39;t   think   it&#39;s   sustainable   in   the   long   term   to   have   a   package   ecosystem   that&#39;s   solely   from   source,   and   it&#39;s   for   two   reasons.   Um   one   is   uh   a   scale.   Um   as   you   get   up   to   building   it   larger   and   larger   scales,   um,   it&#39;s   increasingly   difficult   to   build   everything   from   source.   Now,   of   course,   for   language   like   Rust,   where   you   know   the   static   analysis   is   sort   of   a   key   a   key   element   of   the   language,   this   um   uh   you   know   this   is   of   course   a   challenge.   Um   but   the   other   piece   is   um   uh   closed   source   code,   which   uh   while   I   am   an   open   source   person   and   have   uh   pretty   much   only   worked   on   open   source   projects   my   entire   career,   including   m   most   of   my   time   at   NVIDIA,   um   uh   you   know   the   reality   is   that   closed   source   is   out   there.   And   um   I   think   for   Rust   to   uh   uh   be   truly   successful   and   become   a   top   you   know   five   or   a   top   three   language,   um   it   will   need   to   uh   uh   support   um   that   part   of   the   ecosystem   as   well.   Um   and   uh   you   know   I   think   for   Rust   really   to   truly   to   truly   become   one   of   those   top   languages,   it&#39;s   not   sufficient   to   just   have   all   those   closed   source   projects   be   um   uh   limited   to,   oh   well,   you   have   to   expose   your   closed   source   stuff   through   a   C   ABI,   you   know,   or   or   C   ⁇   ABI.   I   think   people   are   gonna   want   to   write   things   natively   in   Rust.   Um   and   so   that   that   is   that   is   one   thing   that   I   uh   I   I&#39;ve   said   for   a   few   years   I   would   expect   Rust   to   uh   uh   uh   to   to   evolve   on.   Um   and   I&#39;m   I&#39;m   glad   to   see   that   there&#39;s   now   some   uh   some   movement   in   that   direction.   So   n   not   not   as   uh   not   as   fiery   of   a   debate   as   I   was   saying   before.   We&#39;re   all   just   like,   yeah,   this   this   working   on   it.
      </p>

        <cite>Jane Losare-Lusby</cite>
      <time>16:32</time>
      <p>
          It&#39;s   like   I   mean   it&#39;s   a   baby   project,   it&#39;s   like   a   long   way   from   like   even   having   anything   to   show   for   it   yet.   But   it&#39;s   it&#39;s   definitely   there&#39;s   you&#39;re   not   the   only   person,   I   think,   who   wants   that.   I   don&#39;t   I   uh   I   definitely   am   much   more   on   the   open   source   side,   but   so   like   I   have   like   it&#39;s   not   my   priority   to   to   to   work   on   support   close   support   stuff   personally.   Um   though   I   understand   that   people   want   to   work   that   way,   I   just   don&#39;t   think   it&#39;s   as   effective   a   way   to   work,   but   you   know,   we   don&#39;t   need   to   get   into   ideological   debate.   Um   and   but   yeah,   it&#39;s   it&#39;s   it&#39;s   there&#39;s   definitely   plenty   of   reasons   even   beyond   those   like   just   like   binary   size,   like   being   able   to   not   have   like   the   same   dependency   duplicated   in   every   application   that   uses   it,   and   things   like   that   where   it&#39;s   like   Rust   needs   to   be   able   to   do   it,   and   so   there&#39;s   there&#39;s   no   there&#39;s   no   debate   there.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>17:22</time>
      <p>
          Yeah.   So   Jane,   do   you   remember   um   that   we   actually   met   um   once   before   and   it   I   think   it   was   at   an   LVM?
      </p>

        <cite>Jane Losare-Lusby</cite>
      <time>17:32</time>
      <p>
          Yeah,   LVM   developer   meetup   2019,   I   think.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>17:35</time>
      <p>
          Yeah,   that   sounds   right.   Yeah.   Uh   and   I   don&#39;t   I   think   at   the   time   you   were   just   like   starting   your   your   Rust   explorations.   You   weren&#39;t   like   a   full   convert   yet.
      </p>

        <cite>Jane Losare-Lusby</cite>
      <time>17:46</time>
      <p>
          No,   I   was   yeah,   it   was   still   that   was   still   when   I   worked   at   scale,   so   I   was   still   a   professional   C   developer.   I   think   I   was   like   quite   well   and   deeply   into   the   hyper   focus   on   Rust.   Yeah.   So   I   was   like,   you   know,   not   not   necessarily   on   like   on   the   Libs   team   or   anything   like   that   yet.   Um   I   think   I   was   I   think   I   might   have   already   been   on   the   Clippy   team   at   that   point.   Um   I   remember   hanging   out   with   Tyler.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>18:08</time>
      <p>
          I   think   you   were   because   I   I   seem   to   recall   you   um   uh   talking   with   great   glee   about   uh   clippy.   Nice.   Yeah.
      </p>

        <cite>Jane Losare-Lusby</cite>
      <time>18:16</time>
      <p>
          It   was   a   good   time.   I   I   I   enjoyed   that   trip.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>18:20</time>
      <p>
          Alright,   kind   of,   what   else   should   we   talk   about?   There&#39;s   the   the   Shinkansen.
      </p>

        <cite>Conor</cite>
      <time>18:25</time>
      <p>
          No,   no,   no.   We&#39;re   not   getting   we&#39;re   not   getting   to   that   yet.   So   I   recently   heard   Bjarna   Struustrap.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>18:30</time>
      <p>
          I   gotta   I   gotta   share   something   that   my   girlfriend   just   texted   me.   And   I   gotta   disappeared.   I   just   have   to   pray   to   God   that   she   never   listens   to   this   podcast.
      </p>

        <cite>Jane Losare-Lusby</cite>
      <time>18:41</time>
      <p>
          Oh   no.
      </p>

        <cite>Conor</cite>
      <time>18:44</time>
      <p>
          So   um   Does   this   have   a   backstory?   I   thought   you   were   just   gonna   read   us   a   text,   my   guy.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>18:50</time>
      <p>
          It   has   a   backstory.   I&#39;m   gonna   think   of   the   backstory.
      </p>

        <cite>Conor</cite>
      <time>18:53</time>
      <p>
          We   have   how   long   is   it?
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>18:54</time>
      <p>
          Our   dog,   our   dog.   Um   very   smart.   Oh   my   goodness.
      </p>

        <cite>Conor</cite>
      <time>19:03</time>
      <p>
          I   can&#39;t,   I&#39;m   not   airing   this.   I&#39;m   not   airing   this.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>19:06</time>
      <p>
          I   just   got   a   text   from   the   girlfriend.
      </p>

        <cite>Conor</cite>
      <time>19:09</time>
      <p>
          This   is   the   worst.   Literally,   you   know,   so   this   is   what   happened,   Jane.   Bryce   has   just   gone   downhill   as   a   co-host   ever   since   episode   zero.
      </p>

        <cite>Jane Losare-Lusby</cite>
      <time>19:21</time>
      <p>
          No,   no,   no.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>19:22</time>
      <p>
          I   went,   I   went,   I   went   up   because   episode   zero,   I   didn&#39;t   have   a   proper   microphone.   Then   I   bought   the   good   microphone.   So   then   episode   one,   that   was   really   where   I   peaked.
      </p>

        <cite>Jane Losare-Lusby</cite>
      <time>19:32</time>
      <p>
          And   from   there,   wait,   so   when   it   when   you   said   episode   101,   that   wasn&#39;t   like   a   this   is   a   Vanneginner   course.   This   is   like   the   beginning   of   the   Rust   Learning.   It   was   actually   the   101st   episode.
      </p>

        <cite>Conor</cite>
      <time>19:42</time>
      <p>
          That   was   the   101st   episode.   Yeah.   Did   you   did   you   aim   that   to   be   Oh   no,   that   was   totally   an   accident.   And   I&#39;m   just   realizing   now   that   the   we   the   101   episode   correspond   to   us   trying   to   learn   stuff.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>19:53</time>
      <p>
          That   was   literally   totally   you   trying   to   learn   something,   and   me   apparently   teaching   it   to   you.
      </p>

        <cite>Conor</cite>
      <time>19:58</time>
      <p>
          Yeah.   But   I&#39;ve   been   threatening   Bryce   for   like   episode   90   to   100   when   we   had   Kate   Gregory   on   uh   because   Bryce   was   like   eating   his   dinner   and   kept   on   interrupting,   and   uh,   you   know,   asked   Kate   a   question   about   the   cabin   she   was   in,   let   her   get   four   words   into   the   question,   and   then   like   interrupted   her   to   tell   her   something   about   his   dog.   And   I   was   like,   Bryce,   what   are   you   doing?   And   then   I   said,   You&#39;re   on   you&#39;re   on   thin   ice.   And   then   I   said,   I&#39;m   gonna   start   trying   out   new   co-hosts.   Then   I   went   and   did.   I   tried   out   a   new   co-host,   former   co-host   of   CPP   Cast,   Jason   Turner.   And   then   Bryce   last   week   said,   uh,   because   I   in   I   indicated   that   I   might   have   recorded   without   him,   and   then   I   could   just   tell   Bright   Bryce   was   heartbroken.   He   was   just   like,   don&#39;t   record   without   me.   And   now   here   I   am   being   like,   you   know   what?   I   did   the   right   thing,   Bryce.   You&#39;re   back   on   thin   ice.   Except   this   might   not   even   air   because   people   are   just   gonna   be   confused   on   why   I&#39;m   giving   you   a   hard   time,   uh,   because   they   won&#39;t   have   heard   the   story   that   you   just   told.   Because   it&#39;s   it&#39;s   inappropriate,   Bryce.   Clean   up   your   act.
      </p>

        <cite>Jane Losare-Lusby</cite>
      <time>21:00</time>
      <p>
          You   can   just   like   cut   right   after   he&#39;s   like,   I&#39;m   gonna   tell   you   the   story,   and   then   just   cut   to   like,   we&#39;re   not   airing   that.
      </p>

        <cite>Conor</cite>
      <time>21:10</time>
      <p>
          All   right,   back   to   the   question   that   I   had.   So   this   is   gonna   be   we&#39;re   entering   hot   take   territory.   We&#39;ll   see   what   we   can   get   out   uh   from   Jane.   Recently,   on   episode   uh   155,   which   really   they   only   started   it   recording   them   at   like   episode   120,   of   another   podcast   called   C   Club.   Bjarna   Strustrap,   they   just   it&#39;s   like   a   Zoom   meeting   and   they   just   record   it.   So   Bjarna   sometimes   joins   uh   creator   of   the   C   language,   I   assume   everyone   knows   that.   And   at   some   point   in   the   podcast,   it   comes,   Bjarna   ends   up   saying,   I   don&#39;t   even   really   re   remember   the   lead   up   to   it.   They   end   up   making   a   joke   about   Rust,   saying   that,   oh,   Rust   is   good   because   we   don&#39;t   want   to   get   like,   you   know,   downvoted   on   the   internet   uh   by   saying   something   bad   about   Rust.   And   then   Bjarna   says,   Oh   yes,   the   Rust   community   is   much   better   at   propaganda.   Than   C.
      </p>

        <cite>Jane Losare-Lusby</cite>
      <time>22:02</time>
      <p>
          The   Rush   people   are   very,   very   good   at   uh   propaganda.   Far,   far   better   than   the   C   crowd.
      </p>

        <cite>Conor</cite>
      <time>22:13</time>
      <p>
          And   I   was   a   bit   confused   because   I&#39;ve   only   been   dabbling   around   in   this   language   for   like   a   week   and   a   bit,   and   from   my   experience,   it&#39;s   just   better   in   a   lot   of   ways.   That   doesn&#39;t   seem   like   propaganda   to   me.   That   just   seems   like   you   got   a   better   story.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>22:28</time>
      <p>
          So   I   think   Bianca   is   almost   certainly   referring   to   what   I   talked   about   earlier,   which   is   the   memory   safety   thing.   That   that   um   uh   how   is   that   propaganda   though?   Because   for   whatever   reason,   I   think   some   people   uh   of   the   in   the   C   community   feel   that   um   that   the   memory   safety   aspect   of   Rust   is   nonsense   in   some   way,   or   that   we   can   achieve   the   same   effect   in   C   or   something   to   that.   But   but   but   my   my   my   strong   suspicion   is   that   uh   what   was   meant   by   that   is   is   is   a   hyper   focus   on   uh   on   on   the   the   the   question   of   like   memory   safety.   And   and   I&#39;ll   prove   it   to   you   because   almost   all   of   the   response   from   somebody   like   Vyarna   to   Rust   has   been   around   improving   memory   safety   in   C.   Like,   oh   people   are   concerned   about   you   know   this   one   aspect,   like   this   is   the   problem.   This   is   the   problem   with   C   that   it&#39;s   not   a   memory   safe   language,   and   if   we   solve   that   problem,   then   all   of   C&#39;s   problems   should   be   solved.   Everything   will   be   perfect.
      </p>

        <cite>Conor</cite>
      <time>23:43</time>
      <p>
          What&#39;s   Jane?   Well,   Jane,   what&#39;s   your   take?   And   and   also   to   layer   on   top   of   the   question,   because   you&#39;re   inside   the   Rust   community   and   like   part   of   a   couple   of   the   um   Rust   teams.   Is   there   like   inside   of   Rust,   are   you   aware   that   people   outside   of   Rust   think   that   you   guys   have   a   propaganda   machine?
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>24:02</time>
      <p>
          Well,   okay,   okay.   This   is   one   one   one   person,   one   person.
      </p>

        <cite>Conor</cite>
      <time>24:05</time>
      <p>
          I   mean,   I   do   get   a   sense   that   like   a   lot   of   C,   especially   on   slash   the   subreddit,   C   subreddit,   like   they   just   they   don&#39;t   want   to   hear   anything   about   Rust.   Like   they&#39;re   they&#39;re   uninterested   in   what   Rust   Rust   devs   and   the   lessons   that   Rust   people   have   learned   have   to   share.   Um   and   as   like   a   polyglot   that   loves   all   programming   languages,   including   you   know   some   of   the   most   widely   hated   programming   languages   like   Pearl,   I   love   Pearl.   Pearl&#39;s   great,   you   know,   very   similar   to   Python   in   a   lot   of   ways   that   people   seem   to   be   refusing   to   acknowledge.   But   anyway,   so   uh   I   find   that   kind   of   just   like   that   just   hurting   us   by   doing   that.   And   so   I&#39;m   just   interested,   like   from   like   a   Rust   insider&#39;s   point   of   view,   is   this   news   to   you?   Does   do   people   inside   the   Rust   community   are   they   are   they   aware?   And   any   inside   details   you   could   share,   I&#39;m   sure.   I   know   I   would   be   interested   to   hear,   and   some   of   our   listeners,   I&#39;m   sure.
      </p>

        <cite>Jane Losare-Lusby</cite>
      <time>24:58</time>
      <p>
          So   there&#39;s   a   meme   in   the   Rust   community,   and   I   think   you   can   Google   this   and   see   some   really   beautiful   some   really   funny   and   hilarious   vaporwave   art   about   the   Rust   evangelism   strike   force,   the   RESF.   Is   this   a   real   thing?   Yeah,   there&#39;s   like   subreddits   to   it   too.   Um   so   we&#39;re   definitely   very   aware   of   this   uh   this   kind   of   perception.   And   I   think   there&#39;s   definitely   I   think   Rust   has   a   tendency   to   get   people   really   excited   when   they   get   into   it.   And   so   like   you   won&#39;t   find   people   on   the   project   going   around   and   evangelizing   aggressively.   I   think   like   if   you   look   at   like   actual   project   contributors,   they&#39;re   they&#39;re   they   tend   to   be   pretty   reserved.   I   think   there   I   think   right   now   the   prevailing   attitude   is   more   aligned   with   your   attitude,   which   is   like   all   the   programming   languages,   like   there&#39;s   not   one   right   way   to   do   things   that   all   the   programming   languages   have   value,   and   we   should   all   be   learning   from   each   other.   And   that   but   like,   especially   people,   like   new   people   who   are   really   excited,   they&#39;re   they&#39;re   a   lot   more   likely   to   be   like   running   around   and   being   like,   Have   you   heard   of   Rust?   And   like   that   that   does   happen.   I   mean,   and   I&#39;m   sure   that   C   developers   see   like   other   C   developers   who   are   learning   about   Rust   coming   in   and   being   like,   Well,   you   should   have   rewritten   in   Rust,   that   would   have   solved   this   m   this   one   bug   you   ran   into   or   something.   And   it&#39;s   like,   you   know,   not   always   the   most   helpful   suggestion,   and   it   can   be   exhausting.   And   there&#39;s   definitely,   I   would   say,   even   like   within   the   project,   like   a   pushback   against   people   like   actually   engaging   in   like   the   Rust   evangelism   strike   force   or   like   rewriting   in   Rust   memes   and   like   kind   of   supporting   that   because   it   can   be   like   a   bit   counterproductive.   And   um   definitely   a   preference   for   kind   of   mutually   supporting   other   communities   and   being   respectful.   Um   so   we   don&#39;t   we   like   I   don&#39;t   think   there   is   actively   there&#39;s   there&#39;s   definitely   no   active   propaganda   machine   within   the   Rust   project.   Like   I   think   there   are   uh   times   in   the   past   where   we&#39;ve   been   a   lot   better,   especially   like   when   we   were   doing   1.0,   I   think   they   were   a   lot   more   effective   at   marketing.   I   think   these   days,   um   there&#39;s   there&#39;s   a   lot   more   chaos   and   we&#39;re   not   as   coordinated   in   that   regard.   And   it&#39;s   something   that   we&#39;re   working   on.   We   like   if   you   if   you   look   on   the   blog   post   on   the   blog,   there&#39;s   like   multiple   blog   posts   over   the   last   year   about   updating   Rust   governance   at   the   top   level,   um,   which   is   one   of   the   things   I&#39;ve   been   involved   in   and   am   very   excited   about.   And   this   is   like   when   you&#39;re   talking,   Bryce,   about   like   getting   the   effective   language   evolution,   this   was   like   kind   of   speaking   to   my   heart   because   like,   yeah,   I   think   I   understand   how   important   it   is   to   be   able   to   set   up   an   environment   where   people   can   collaborate   effectively,   and   it&#39;s   something   that   like   we   struggle   with   too.   Like   I   know   you   you   feel   like   Rust   has   it   all   like   just   like   really   good   at   the   moment.   I   do   think   like   we&#39;re   probably   in   a   better   spot.
      </p>

        <cite>Bryce</cite>
      <time>27:38</time>
      <p>
          The   I   think   the   difference   is   um   the   at   least   I&#39;m   aware   that   there   have   been   some   problems   in   Rust   evolution   and   and   and   leadership   um   as   of   late.   Um   the   difference   that   I   see   is   the   willingness   to   uh   address   and   improve   things.   Um   I   don&#39;t   see   that.   I&#39;m   sorry.   The   the   C   Did   you   say   I&#39;m   sorry?
      </p>

        <cite>Jane Losare-Lusby</cite>
      <time>28:09</time>
      <p>
          Yeah,   like   like   empathizing,   not   apologizing.   That&#39;s   amazing.
      </p>

        <cite>Conor</cite>
      <time>28:13</time>
      <p>
          That&#39;s   I   I   thought   you   like   kind   of   whispered   that,   and   I   was   like,   oh   wow,   like   that   was   very   nice   that   you&#39;re   I   like   I   uh   that&#39;s   unfortunate.   Um   because   it   is. Thanks   for   listening.   We   hope   you   enjoyed   and   have   a   great   day.
      </p>