6 ms·
> Option 1: you rely on every single developer to be careful and make no memory-leaking mistakes. Nope. You use a language that dont have this problem, and han
by phplovesong 4y ago
> Option 1: you rely on every single developer to be careful and make no memory-leaking mistakes.
Nope. You use a language that dont have this problem, and handles memory safety within the compiler, just like what Rust does.
- anonymoushn 4y agoRust doesn't attempt to guarantee no memory leaks. Memory leaks are allowed in safe Rust.
- tjoff 4y agoSigh, no GC language guarantees no memory leaks either.
- anonymoushn 4y agoSo when someone comments "Or we could use a language that doesn't let you write memory leaks using the type system, like Java" then we can reply that that's not true about Java. But in this comment thread people only wrote that about Rust.
- tjoff 4y agoRead the thread. The implication was that non-GC languages leads to memory leaks. Rust was then presented as an option that isn't worse than a GC language in that regard. Countering that with "Rust doesn't attempt to guarantee no memory leaks." is just silly...
- anonymoushn 4y agoI read it. What problem is Rust claimed not to have, which C and C++ have? Which GC language makes no attempt to collect unreachable reference cycles, so that Rust is no worse?
- kaba0 4y agoRust is a tiny language compared to like the top 5 most popular languages, why do you assume that everyone should switch boats for that?
- tjoff 4y agoRust was just one suggestion.... Modern C++ is another. Swift is another, etc.
- phplovesong 4y agoI dont. I just suggested one language that deal with memory safety without an GC. There are multiple other languages besides Rust to choose from.