4 ms·

> We considered reducing the scope, but ultimately decided to keep the scope pretty broad because writing underhanded code in Rust is hard Are we sure of this?

• Manishearth 10y ago
  > Are we sure of this? The contest may prove otherwise. No, we're not. Like I said, this can change in future competitions. It's no big deal if the first one is too easy. If the first one is too hard we may not get submissions and won't know if it is due to lack of interests or if it is too hard. My baseline for determining this was basically that almost all of the underhanded C submissions use tricks that just can't work in Rust. Furthermore, remember that the code will be run through clippy too. Many of the gotchas (e.g. Option::iter()) that can be used to create potential underhandedness should get caught by clippy. But yes, we fully hope to feed back any findings into the compiler/libraries/clippy.
  • vvanders 10y ago
    I love that you're using this as feedback into improving the ecosystem. I'll say one thing about the Rust community, they really have their shit together when it comes to stability and things like this. I don't think I've ever seen a language release new versions with such consistent cadence and predictability.
• kibwen 10y ago
  > The contest may prove otherwise. Which is exactly why I insisted on keeping the language in the opening paragraph as humble as possible. :P
• SideburnsOfDoom 10y ago
  > Are we sure of this? The contest may prove otherwise. Isn't testing that assumption a big point of the contest?