The same old arguments...
The same old arguments...
Posted Dec 8, 2025 16:30 UTC (Mon) by moltonel (subscriber, #45207)In reply to: The same old arguments... by pizza
Parent article: Eventual Rust in CPython
These facts sound like a rebutal, but I'm not sure of what ? Yes, some (not all) community help is tax-funded and/or legally mandated, and has a price for the overall community. And yet we still do it: we pass those laws, spend that money, and encourage these volunteers. Why ? Because we collectively decided that it was a good thing to do, whether for ethical or practical reasons. Societies keep adjusting how far community help can/should go, but there's a strong correlation between a healthy community and a helpful one.
> Generally, that "extra work" is "patches welcome" and increasingly, "supply testing/CI resources that can be relied upon".
Yes, though even "patches welcome" is not free: it costs reviewer time, ongoing maintenance, implicit commitment, etc. Every project is different: some don't accept patches, some will spend a lot of resources to help a single user.
In CPython's case, the argument is that remaining C-only has an ongoing cost, paid by the project to help minority platforms. That balance has shifted over time: 10 years ago, missing platform support was seen as Rust's problem and could legitimately prevent Rust adoption. Today more and more, it is seen as that platform's problem and dropping support has become the lesser evil.
