5 ms·
Technically though, isn’t memory safety not necessary in some cases? For example, single player video games. You can exploit your own machine if you want, but
by mr_00ff00 3y ago
Technically though, isn’t memory safety not necessary in some cases?
For example, single player video games. You can exploit your own machine if you want, but that’s not an issue.
I like rust, but if I ran into async issues and annoying stuff, I could see a world where I grab a non-memory safe language to make games easily.
- nequo 3y agoCrashing the program during runtime and having to debug it then is still a worse experience than knowing before running it that it cannot crash (due to memory errors). This certainty comes at a cost, either by negotiating with the Rust compiler or by putting up with a GC. But depending on your calculus, that cost might be worth paying.
- pjmlp 3y agoIt is an issue if it also allows players to work around DLC and other goodies. Or if having the game on the system can be used by another malicious application as jumping point into root access, starting it as subprocess and injecting the exploit. Example, Windows attacks via Notepad.
- yjftsjthsd-h 3y agoMemory safety isn't just a security thing, it's also a reliability thing. That is, even if my games have zero security sensitivity I'd still like them to not crash or corrupt data.