3 ms·
> Thankfully we have actual data on this, not just random numbers, and no, this is not the case in practice. Mind to share that data? I think it would be hard
by geertj 2y ago
> Thankfully we have actual data on this, not just random numbers, and no, this is not the case in practice.
Mind to share that data? I think it would be hard to get quantitative data either way.
- pcwalton 2y ago70% of high severity security problems in Chrome are memory safety bugs: https://www.chromium.org/Home/chromium-security/memory-safety/ https://www.chromium.org/Home/chromium-security/memory-safet... You can find several papers about Rust in particular by searching for [rust memory safety analysis].
- geertj 2y agoI am familiar with that number but this does not address the point the top-level comment is making. The commenter claims is that there exists a class of problems where lifetime and ownership are not knowable at compile time, and makes the claim that for these problems Rust is worse than C++.
- pcwalton 2y agoWell, I don't know what "worse" means in this context. If it means "less memory safe", that's clearly not true: RefCell and Mutex are formally memory safe, while the C++ equivalents are not. If it means "less correct" in a more vague sense, then that's essentially an argument that Rust programs have more bugs than C++ programs, which seems dubious and certainly not something I'd accept at face value.