5 ms·
I'm excited about the C++ lifetimes work, but it's important to recognize that its goals are much more modest than the goals of memory-safe languages. They aim
by roca 7y ago
I'm excited about the C++ lifetimes work, but it's important to recognize that its goals are much more modest than the goals of memory-safe languages. They aim to catch many common memory-safety bugs, which is very valuable, but that's not nearly the same thing as guaranteeing the absence of memory-safety bugs. https://robert.ocallahan.org/2018/09/more-realistic-goals-for-c-lifetimes-10.html https://robert.ocallahan.org/2018/09/more-realistic-goals-fo...
- pjmlp 7y agoTrue, but that way I can still do my .NET / C++/WinRT interop without having to reboot the world, keeping the nice Visual Studio mixed mode debugging integration and the whole Windows infrastructure that is build around C++. Maybe now with Microsoft having some care for Rust, the tooling situation will improve, but right now, even if handicapped, C++ lifetimes are easier to sell in some shops than rebooting the whole stack in Rust. And in the end they all share the same goal, improved safety in our daily stacks, even the bits we only touch as user.