5 ms·

That's two different things. If your program does not compile anymore because it was relying on undefined behaviour, it was wrong from the beginning and deserv

by adev_ 7y ago

That's two different things. If your program does not compile anymore because it was relying on undefined behaviour, it was wrong from the beginning and deserved it. It is completely different of old sane codebase not compiling anymore due to syntactic sugar change in the language.

bluejekyll 7y ago
Those are not completely different things. I know it’s only 5 years, and while I know it has occurred, I personally have never had a breakage in my Rust codebases due to undefined behavior. That is a stronger guarantee being made by Rust than C or C++ have made.
dralley 7y ago
>> It is completely different of old sane codebase not compiling anymore due to syntactic sugar change in the language. That is not very common with Rust. If you just download some project off of Github (or using some dependency) from 2015, it is very very likely to "just work" even with a new compiler, due to how editions work. A more likely way to encounter issues is by pasting some code from Stackoverflow into a Rust project that is using a different edition. Yes, that can happen, but it's not anywhere close to as big of a problem.
- shepmaster 7y ago
  And even then, I try to update any SO questions and answers that are still useful to the latest edition, as it’s more likely someone who doesn’t know about editions will be playing around with 2018.
  - FridgeSeal 7y ago
    I see your work around Stack Overflow a lot and I’d like to thank you for that: your answers and contributions have helped me significantly, multiple times.
- adev_ 7y ago
  > That is not very common with Rust. I never say it is. You guys are quite on defensive stance :)
masklinn 7y ago
> It is completely different of old sane codebase not compiling anymore due to syntactic sugar change in the language. By and large, this has not happened to rust. This: > If your program does not compile anymore because it was relying on undefined behaviour, it was wrong from the beginning and deserved it. Has sort-of happened in that soundness fixes are allowed to break BC.

by adev_ 7y ago

bluejekyll 7y ago

Those are not completely different things. I know it’s only 5 years, and while I know it has occurred, I personally have never had a breakage in my Rust codebases due to undefined behavior. That is a stronger guarantee being made by Rust than C or C++ have made.

dralley 7y ago

>> It is completely different of old sane codebase not compiling anymore due to syntactic sugar change in the language. That is not very common with Rust. If you just download some project off of Github (or using some dependency) from 2015, it is very very likely to "just work" even with a new compiler, due to how editions work. A more likely way to encounter issues is by pasting some code from Stackoverflow into a Rust project that is using a different edition. Yes, that can happen, but it's not anywhere close to as big of a problem.

shepmaster 7y ago
And even then, I try to update any SO questions and answers that are still useful to the latest edition, as it’s more likely someone who doesn’t know about editions will be playing around with 2018.
- FridgeSeal 7y ago
  I see your work around Stack Overflow a lot and I’d like to thank you for that: your answers and contributions have helped me significantly, multiple times.
adev_ 7y ago
> That is not very common with Rust. I never say it is. You guys are quite on defensive stance :)

masklinn 7y ago

> It is completely different of old sane codebase not compiling anymore due to syntactic sugar change in the language. By and large, this has not happened to rust. This: > If your program does not compile anymore because it was relying on undefined behaviour, it was wrong from the beginning and deserved it. Has sort-of happened in that soundness fixes are allowed to break BC.