I probably didn't describe myself well enough. I was under the assumption that there was a Rust middleware to interface with the C API, and some of the C maintainers objected even to this because they feel they will need to be in communication with the Rust maintainer(s). I am not against Rust being used alongside, or even in the kernel. I was just pointing out some of the objections the C developers were stating.

I believe there is a middle ground where everyone can be happy, and firmly believe that the Rust maintainers in the Linux project will keep on top of the C interfaces to know when there will be changes. Going back to my comment, I realize that I presented why the C developer/maintainers don't want Rust, but that is not my own stance. In my opinion, there is enough interest in the Rust for Linux project that acting as though there is only a single maintainer, and if they disappear the entire project fails and all Rust code stops compiling is unrealistic and FUD.

I can see a whole host of problems being tackled, especially in driver development and safety concerns, by using Rust. I feel the C maintainers are acting as if the entire kernel is going to be rewritten in Rust in a timeframe where any of these people would still even be capable of using a keyboard or not suffering from severe dementia.

My apologies to anyone that thought I was pushing for one side or the other, I was only repeating the recent "drama" that I heard was going on, and I respect both sides.