> array-bounds-checking bugs. Rust tries very very hard to avoid bounds-checking bugs, because it's central to the safety promise, maybe I'm misunderstanding y

> array-bounds-checking bugs. Rust tries very very hard to avoid bounds-checking bugs, because it's central to the safety promise, maybe I'm misunderstanding you? > either "list was re-ordered, you now have the wrong item" ... "can't compact the list, it just keeps growing even when old items are no longer used" bugs. I have no direct experience implementing this pattern, but it's good to know that leptos (and others) tend to use one well-tested library that addresses these concerns[1]. > Sure, you no longer have to satisfy the borrow checker - but it was a tool to help you catch bugs, and you've cleverly avoided getting that help. My impression is that one can perhaps claim "one traded compile-time checks of safety for runtime _panics_ when unsafe things are about to happen", and not that using this pattern exposes one to the same issues that the borrow checker avoids. [1] https://docs.rs/slotmap/latest/slotmap/index.html#why-not-index-a-vec-or-use-slab-stable-vec-etc https://docs.rs/slotmap/latest/slotmap/index.html#why-not-in...