CrabLang

https://crablang.org/

by return_to_monke • 3 years ago

116 77 3 years ago

crablang.org

The_Colonel2• 3 years ago

So ... will anyone reveal the secret and say of which language this is a fork ok?

No samples, no documentation, vague reference to "plant fungus"?

mjmsmith• 3 years ago

https://extension.umn.edu/plant-diseases/cedar-apple-rust

18271622• 3 years ago

An apple tree, once infected, can colonize junipers and cedars as far as 6 miles away(!). Yes, a highly infectious and amazing organism.

https://portal.ct.gov/CAES/Fact-Sheets/Plant-Pathology/Cedar... "As many as 7.5 million spores may be produced in a single gall and these spores have been known to be carried as far as 6 miles."

a2800276• 3 years ago

Rust

The_Colonel2• 3 years ago

Thanks. I've only known the "oxidized metal" meaning of "rust".

Brian_K_White7• 3 years ago

Part of the point is that if you read the Rust foundation's recent document strictly enough, anyone else aren't actually allowed to say the name Rust, since they didn't get explicit permission and/or aren't willing to comply with all of the terms.

So they don't dare say the name to avoid any chance of being sued.

Not that it's actually likely, but the point is that the document is that bad, so IF you take it at it's word, then well that's how it evaluates out, is the only way to be safe is just don't use the actual logo or name at all. Anything else you do technically runs afoul of at least one of the many terms and conditions in there.

jhanschoo• 3 years ago

You can always use the word Rust to refer to the actual Rust language or the Rust project. In a similar fashion the Python Software Foundation will sue you for trademark infringement if you create a general-purpose programming language distinct from Python and call it Python.

owlglass• 3 years ago

From the GitHub repo:

* A community fork of a language named after a plant fungus. All of the memory-safe features you love, now with 100% less bureaucracy! *

I assumed with the 'oxide' and 'ferrous' references that Rust's etymology had to do with corrosion, and while that's part of the explanation, it's mostly about fungi [1]

[1] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/16494822/why-is-it-calle...

adrianmonk• 3 years ago

I assumed it was a joke based on the phrase "close to the metal" (zero-cost abstractions allowing high-level features without sacrificing performance). Nothing is closer to metal than an oxidation layer.

Sindisil• 3 years ago

This is similar to all the snake references around Python. That language being named after Monty Python's Flying Circus.

Waterluvian• 3 years ago

Wow had no idea. My assumption was it was about building something so durable and stable that it’ll be around forever.

Which doesn’t make sense given oxidization slowly robs something of its durability. But Discord is named using a word that means “disagreement and lack of harmony” so I kind of look past weird branding in tech.

toomuchtodo• 3 years ago

jadodev• 3 years ago

This was not a "knee-jerk" reaction, nor was it an attempt to spread fear or cause panic. While the document the foundation drafted did lead to the fork, we believe it is an overdue solution to a problem that already existed, and addresses some issues that many community members have had for some time.

This is obviously very knee-jerk and will either die or end up creating the same bureaucracy that Rust has. People love to complain about bureaucracy without understanding it exists for many reasons. The Rust teams are far more equipped to handle the development of Rust than anyone entertaining this fork (unless, of course, a significant number of members of the Rust teams decide to move over).

bogwog2• 3 years ago

The Rust teams are far more equipped to handle the development of Rust than anyone entertaining this fork (unless, of course, a significant number of members of the Rust teams decide to move over).

As a form of protest against the silly Rust Foundation, a fork of the language which is simply a rebranded mirror of Rust sources would work.

0x08• 3 years ago

so does this mean that people that use crablang are crab people... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ykWPyaqbebo

Jokes aside, good to see this fork.

armchairhacker• 3 years ago

The Rust trademark is proposal published literally to see what the community thinks. And the community thinks…it’s a bad idea.

So as long as the foundation changes their mind I really don’t think they‘ve done anything wrong, and anyone who’s said “the Rust foundation is trademarking the name ‘Rust’” or “the Rust foundation has trademarked the name ‘Rust’” overreacted.

If they listen to all this feedback and still move forward with the trademark, then they’re truly awful, since they, the leaders of this “community-driven organization”. just ignored 90% of the community. But that hasn’t happened yet, in fact all they’ve done is actively “seek community input” by publishing this draft.

hobofan3• 3 years ago

the Rust foundation has trademarked the name "Rust"

Just to clarify: Rust, Cargo and Clippy have already been registered as trademarks for some time now (AFAIK originally by Mozilla, with ownership transfered to the Rust Foundation upon its creation).

There is also an existing trademark policy, with the draft concerning an update to it.

lwansbrough• 3 years ago

+1. The reaction to the recent developments is in range of being a case of mass hysteria. Unbelievable levels of cringe and FUD being produced by a few prominent members of the community.

serial_dev2• 3 years ago

You are blaming the people who point out there is a problem, instead of the people causing the problem.

The proposed policy is terrible and based on the reaction of the people behind the proposal, they are fully determined to go through with it, which, to me, was very disheartening.

I see that a small part of the Rust community would love to blame it all on "Youtubers and streamers" without actually addressing any of their points.

The community, including many (not just a few) prominent members, gave detailed feedback on all the channels (see blogs, reddit, twitter and yt), and the only "rebuttal" of their points I hear is "stop the FUD", "you are not a lawyer so shut up", and "streamers drama".

Brian_K_White7• 3 years ago

Nowhere in your supposedly superior evaluation of the situation do I see a single of the supposedly cringe fud hysterical points addressed.

They all made specific points with the reasoning explained. If the reasoning was somehow invalid, you sure didn't show how.

rvz• 3 years ago

So here comes the in-fighting. Looks like someone listened to the call to action to fork the language [0] and just did that to their 'beloved' language.

Again, the moment the Rust Foundation chose to be a 501(c)(6) it was all going to go downhill from there as I and others have warned about this [1] years before.

There is a good reason why other language foundations like Python Software Foundation, NumFocus (Julia lang), D Language Foundation, Zig Software Foundation, R Foundation, etc, are 501(c)(3).

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35524666

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35583460

woodruffw2• 3 years ago

I’m struggling to understand why the IRS nonprofit type is material here. Your previous post doesn’t really explain it either: a 501(c)(3) can impose trademark restrictions in the exact same way.

marcosdumay• 3 years ago

I don't think anybody can impose trademark restrictions the way the Rust Foundation was planing to...

But anyway, the details of how a non-profit is created have a lot of impact on the incentives for their managers.

programmarchy• 3 years ago

Reminds me of the io.js [1] fork of Node in the battle with Joyent.

[1] https://gist.github.com/maxogden/d96123138522c84cdb25

jitl2• 3 years ago

IO forked for technical reasons because Joyent wouldn’t entertain improvements. This rust drama is because some programming Youtubers/streamers don’t understand copyright and fair use, and of course want to bait rage clicks.

spion6• 3 years ago

Is there a lawyer that agrees with that statement?

A reminder that the Debian project found it necessary to fork Firefox into Iceweasel for a very similar reason.

throwaway2023032• 3 years ago

That is a massive simplification of what has russled peoples jimmies. The proposal goes a bit too far with what is reasonably required

Brian_K_White7• 3 years ago

A trademark copyright document tries to have opinions about allowing guns at conventions, and you try to say the youtubers don't understand copyright?

wiz21c• 3 years ago

FTA:

Our main goal is to ensure that the community has an alternative that aligns with their values and desire for unrestricted use.

How is the use restricted nowadays ?

Moreover, wouldn't it be better to help the gcc's rust front end ? GNU will protect the community for sure.

spion6• 3 years ago

There is a new proposed trademark policy that bans the use of the "rust" trademark in domain names, package names and educational material (unless the educational material starts with a disclamer denouncing affiliation with the Rust (TM) Foundation https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/12e7tdb/rust_trademar...)

Yoric• 3 years ago

Is that a problem?

rascul• 3 years ago

Is rust-gcc an allowed name according to the draft policy?

efaref• 3 years ago

No. And that's basically the point of the concerns everyone has.

spencerchubb• 3 years ago

So the only difference with CrabLang is that others are allowed to use the CrabLang name and logo in the ecosystem?

And I don't think CrabLang will be allowed to just copy the Rust logo.

sporkl• 3 years ago

The logo CrabLang is using is Ferris, which is not an official Rust logo, and also in the public domain I believe.

https://www.rustacean.net/

bogwog2• 3 years ago

CrabLang - the world’s most unpolished programming language!

doodlesdev• 3 years ago

https://archive.ph/o4It6

skrebbel• 3 years ago

Am I the only one who feels like their stubborn insistence to not say which language they’re forking is just childish? What is this, Hogwarts?

I recognize that the whole argument is trademark law and controlling the name “Rust”, but someone having a trademark doesn’t mean that outsiders aren’t allowed to say or write the name.

Suggesting that this is the case, is exactly the kind of FUD they say they’re not after.

spion6• 3 years ago

someone having a trademark doesn’t mean that outsiders aren’t allowed to say or write the name.

Did you read the new trademark policy?

hobofan3• 3 years ago

Yes, and no trademark policy in the world can make uttering the trademark a forbidden word that no one is ever allowed to say/write.

ptx2• 3 years ago

I did, and it says (in section 3.1): "The law [...] prohibits creating a 'likelihood of confusion' but allows for 'nominative use.' For example, you cannot say you are distributing the Rust compiler when what you are distributing differs from the version distributed by the Rust Project, because people would be confused [...] However, you can say you use and like the Rust software, that you participate in the Rust community, that you are providing an unmodified version of the Rust software, or that you wrote a manual describing how to develop software using Rust."

And in section 4.1.3: "You may use the Word Marks, but not the Logos, to truthfully describe the relationship between your software and ours. Our Marks should be used after a verb or preposition that describes the relationship between your software and ours. So you may say, for example, 'the Dungeness tool for the Rust compiler' but may not say 'the Dungeness Rust compiler,' which suggests that Dungeness is the source of the Rust compiler."

Brian_K_White7• 3 years ago

"Am I the only one..." Yes. That is exactly the point, that even such obviously allowable uses of the name are actually not allowed. So they are merely adhering to the rules they didn't write or ask for.

If you think it's stupid, well, yes, so does everyone else. That's the wbole point. But it's not everyone else being stupid it's the Rust Foundation.

bmacho2• 3 years ago

tl;dr: you can't announce your project on HN with "written in Rust" at the end of the title, but you can say "written in Crab" instead.

That's it. Everyone loses, the Rust foundation, the Rust users, and the people who don't care about any of them.

jitl2• 3 years ago

There’s nothing in the new trademark policy that discourages saying “written in Rust”

bmacho2• 3 years ago

There are a lot in the new trademark policy that discourage using the word Rust in any possible way that is not explicitly mentioned as permitted. But you are right, stating "written in Rust" is explicitly mentioned as permitted.

    4.1.3 Statements about compatibility, interoperability or derivation

    You may use the Word Marks, but not the Logos, to truthfully describe the relationship between your software and ours. Our Marks should be used after a verb or preposition that describes the relationship between your software and ours. So you may say, for example, "the Dungeness tool for the Rust compiler" but may not say "the Dungeness Rust compiler," which suggests that Dungeness is the source of the Rust compiler. Some other examples that may work for you are:

    [Your software] is written in the Rust language
    [Your software] can compile software written in Rust 
    [Your software] can be used in the Rust compiler toolchain
    [Your software] is based on the official Rust compiler

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ErZlwz9bbSI43dNo-rgQdkov...

speed_spread• 3 years ago

Raging Freedom Fighters overtaking that fork in 3,2,1...

Brian_K_White7• 3 years ago

It's too bad the name is so terrible. It would have been unlikely enough for a fork to go anywhere even without that.

I might have tried "Trust".

EntrePrescott• 3 years ago

"Trust" would sound nice, but it contains "rust" so it might have given an attack surface for a trademark infringement lawsuit by some un-t-rust-able foundation.

lucasyvas• 3 years ago

Fortunately I'm in it for the language and not the name - the fork likely just stands to prove a point and it'll probably end there. But if the governance turns out to be ridiculous the dominant fork will eventually change and most would follow that without hesitation I'd think.

Contributors won't want to work on the whatever the "inferior" version is.

muyuu• 3 years ago

Is it ok to include the copyright message from Rust including references to Rust? https://github.com/crablang/crab/blob/master/COPYRIGHT

What about attribution?

zokier• 3 years ago

"lighthearted" and has logo/mascot brandishing a knife not in a friendly way.

serial_dev2• 3 years ago

I believe it's based on the "mess with crabo, get a stabo" meme.

https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/you-mess-with-crabo-you-get-a...

And let's not pretend that it is anything other than a lighthearted joke.

zamnos• 3 years ago

Ah yes, the lighthearted kind of stabbing, as opposed to the kind that kills people.

numeromancer• 3 years ago

This project will be like a cancer for the rust community.

yebyen3• 3 years ago

I see what you did there.

downvotetruth• 3 years ago

Any pincer attack damage will help get rid of any free radicals by forming a new oxidation layer.

daviddever23box• 3 years ago

You Rust folk are easily wound up.

apaxson• 3 years ago

My favourite part is the PR to delete the entire repo.

tcmart142• 3 years ago

Easiest code review of my life. Can't let bad code through a code review if there is no code at all!

CrabLang

Related Stories