6 ms·
Not only that, but most people in this thread are STILL missing the multiple elephants in the room. First, Rust allows unsafe code in the core language [not si
by armitron 11y ago
Not only that, but most people in this thread are STILL missing the multiple elephants in the room.
First, Rust allows unsafe code in the core language [not simply through FFI as in other safe languages]. So there's a gaping hole that we know will be abused (performance! performance!) right there. Even if we grant
that this is not the case, here is the deal breaker:
The Rust approach to security depends on an ecosystem that follows the same approach. To think that this is more than an utopic dream is to enter cuckoo-land in my opinion. So we digress back to the castles-built-on-top-of-sand.
There's millions of lines of code written in unsafe languages plus all mainstream operating systems. The Rust approach will never work in this sort of environment.
An approach that might work however is unikernels and using a language that promotes design with failures in mind [and makes it extremely easy to rapidly rearchitect/rebuild/redeploy]. Erlang is the best example in my view, but there could be more.
Alas, Rust is not really suitable for this either due to its static nature.
- dang 11y agoYour comments in this thread have been inflammatory, condescending, and vague. That amounts to trolling, whether you intended to or not. You've done it quite a bit in previous threads, too, which is not good. Please don't do this on HN. Here is how to stop: (1) take out everything inflammatory ("It boggles the mind how utterly misguided", etc.) and make neutral statements instead; (2) take out the personal language ("you just don't get it", etc.); (3) replace vague grand claims with specific factual statements. If you do this, you'll not only no longer be breaking the HN guidelines, you'll also be sharing what you know more effectively, which benefits all of us. We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11162577 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11162577 and marked it off-topic.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- steveklabnik 11y ago> we know will be abused (performance! performance!) None of the programs (or at least most, I only checked the first 5) in which Rust is faster than C use unsafe directly. It's in the libraries they use, but safe Rust is very performant. We'll have to agree to disagree about the rest. :)