4 ms·

Well, the general 'Rewrite All in Rust' consensus is that it solves all general programming problems, ever. Yet, the linked repository shows a huge list of cas

Well, the general 'Rewrite All in Rust' consensus is that it solves all general programming problems, ever. Yet, the linked repository shows a huge list of cases in which simple, documented use of Rust can cause Undefined Behavior (a.k.a. 'UB') Pretty much every argument of Rust advocates against C/C++ boils down to either 'but memory safety' or 'but UB'. Yet there are many convincing counter-arguments that boil down to 'but CompCert' or similar, and, as the linked repository shows, there might be at least some truth in there?

steveklabnik 2y ago
No serious person claims that Rust solves every problem ever. Also, many people cite things like Cargo as a reason to prefer Rust over C and C++, as well as other things. UB is a big part of it, of course, but it isn’t the only thing.
- galangalalgol 2y ago
  I selected it for performance reasons myself, the UB protection was a nice benefit that was expected, cargo wasn't expected and is extremely nice coming from the cmake,conan,vcpkg and duct tape world I came from.
- PreInternet01 2y ago
  > No serious person claims that Rust solves every problem ever No, but there are a lot of people claiming that Rust cannot ever have any problems. Just look at this thread. I merely linked to MIRI, and am currently at, like, -10 just for that. Lots of people claiming that it just applies to 'unsafe Rust': is that true or not? Regardless of anything else: can you, as a Rust community leader, please state clearly: is UB in generally safe Rust possible or not?
  - steveklabnik 2y ago
    No, people are not claiming Rust cannot have any problems. UB is not possible in safe Rust, by design. The root cause of UB is always in unsafe code. Miri is useless if your code is 100% safe Rust. The only exception to this is bugs in the compiler, of which there are a few. They’ll be fixed.
    - PreInternet01 2y ago
      > UB is not possible in safe Rust, by design You're available as an expert witness to that fact? Because, eh, well, in at least one of the Rust-related situations that I'm involved in right now, someone might soon very well require the services of a person both as wise and reluctant-to-offer-any-kind-of-compromise as yourself...
      - steveklabnik 2y ago
        Yes, it is a core design tenet of the language. It's as benign a statement as "C# has garbage collection." That's not "reluctant to offer compromise."
        PreInternet01 2y ago
        OK, you truly seem not to understand how much damage you're dealing to the general population using absolutist statements like this, do you? Nor do you seem to understand "compromise", like at all, because you seem to equate it with "tit for that", which is unsurprising, but still... disappointing. In any case, I'm truly done here, in all senses of the word, but I still I wish you and your acolytes the absolute best.
        keybored 2y ago
        Calling Steve Klabnik (of all Core Rust background people, literally all of them) an “absolutist” proves how unreasonable you’re being.
        chiggsy 2y ago
        Why do you feel it is unreasonable for this person to have human failings? What label would you find suitable?
        keybored 2y ago
        You’re either reframing the statement to be about human failings overall—the lack thereof—or you’re assuming the conclusion.
leftyspook 2y ago
> Well, the general 'Rewrite All in Rust' consensus is that it solves all general programming problems, ever. a) There is no such consensus. The actual consensus is that even if Rust solved all problems, it would not be financially feasible to rewrite pretty much any substantial project. b) While Rust does solve many problems, it is nowhere close to solving all safety, otherwise there would be no `unsafe` keyword. Alas, fully proving safety in an impure, turing-complete language is mathematically impossible. c) The only reason you would think that there's some sort of woke Rust lobby, is if you spend way too much time subjecting yourself to opinions of literal sixteen year olds on twitter.
superb_dev 2y ago
> Well, the general 'Rewrite All in Rust' consensus is that it solves all general programming problems, ever. No, that’s not the consensus. This is a strawman.
timeon 2y ago
> Well, the general 'Rewrite All in Rust' consensus is that it solves all general programming problems, ever. This is obvious example of strawman. Why are you doing this?
- PreInternet01 2y ago
  Towards general mental health. I'm just a C# wage slave, and I'll admit, when being prompted, that my language, its vendor, its runtime environment, and its general approach are, to put it kindly, flawed. However, as evidenced by the arguments and voting in this thread, Rust proponents will take no criticism, whatsoever. I linked to a GitHub repository that documents many, many instances in which generally safe Rust causes UB. The same kind of UB that recently hit one of my coworkers, caused a 3-day outage and now (despite all my counseling to the contrary!) will burn them out permanently. My only request: can you guys please back off just a little bit? Programming is already hard enough without the purity wars you're stoking all the time...
  - keybored 2y ago
    Stoking language flame wars based on hysterical exaggeration has never promoted mental health.
    - fargle 2y ago
      to be fair, from his perspective, it's often the rusty crowd who is stoking the flame wars - this sounds like a reaction to them. how often do we hear something like "C and C++ are horribly flawed and completely unsafe. it's basically a crime against humankind and gross negligence to use them"? i get weary of that kind of thing too. i wouldn't approach it by reacting in the same way as the GP comment, but i get it. and it's not really that much of a strawman. it's more exasperation and sarcasm. personally, i'm very interested in rust. but everytime someone at best "overhypes" it or at worse, outright dogs on other languages, it's a negative point toward dealing with the whole rust ecosystem.
      - 2y ago

steveklabnik 2y ago

No serious person claims that Rust solves every problem ever. Also, many people cite things like Cargo as a reason to prefer Rust over C and C++, as well as other things. UB is a big part of it, of course, but it isn’t the only thing.

galangalalgol 2y ago
I selected it for performance reasons myself, the UB protection was a nice benefit that was expected, cargo wasn't expected and is extremely nice coming from the cmake,conan,vcpkg and duct tape world I came from.
PreInternet01 2y ago
> No serious person claims that Rust solves every problem ever No, but there are a lot of people claiming that Rust cannot ever have any problems. Just look at this thread. I merely linked to MIRI, and am currently at, like, -10 just for that. Lots of people claiming that it just applies to 'unsafe Rust': is that true or not? Regardless of anything else: can you, as a Rust community leader, please state clearly: is UB in generally safe Rust possible or not?
- steveklabnik 2y ago
  No, people are not claiming Rust cannot have any problems. UB is not possible in safe Rust, by design. The root cause of UB is always in unsafe code. Miri is useless if your code is 100% safe Rust. The only exception to this is bugs in the compiler, of which there are a few. They’ll be fixed.
  - PreInternet01 2y ago
    > UB is not possible in safe Rust, by design You're available as an expert witness to that fact? Because, eh, well, in at least one of the Rust-related situations that I'm involved in right now, someone might soon very well require the services of a person both as wise and reluctant-to-offer-any-kind-of-compromise as yourself...
    - steveklabnik 2y ago
      Yes, it is a core design tenet of the language. It's as benign a statement as "C# has garbage collection." That's not "reluctant to offer compromise."
      - PreInternet01 2y ago
        OK, you truly seem not to understand how much damage you're dealing to the general population using absolutist statements like this, do you? Nor do you seem to understand "compromise", like at all, because you seem to equate it with "tit for that", which is unsurprising, but still... disappointing. In any case, I'm truly done here, in all senses of the word, but I still I wish you and your acolytes the absolute best.
        keybored 2y ago
        Calling Steve Klabnik (of all Core Rust background people, literally all of them) an “absolutist” proves how unreasonable you’re being.
        chiggsy 2y ago
        Why do you feel it is unreasonable for this person to have human failings? What label would you find suitable?
        keybored 2y ago
        You’re either reframing the statement to be about human failings overall—the lack thereof—or you’re assuming the conclusion.

leftyspook 2y ago

> Well, the general 'Rewrite All in Rust' consensus is that it solves all general programming problems, ever. a) There is no such consensus. The actual consensus is that even if Rust solved all problems, it would not be financially feasible to rewrite pretty much any substantial project. b) While Rust does solve many problems, it is nowhere close to solving all safety, otherwise there would be no `unsafe` keyword. Alas, fully proving safety in an impure, turing-complete language is mathematically impossible. c) The only reason you would think that there's some sort of woke Rust lobby, is if you spend way too much time subjecting yourself to opinions of literal sixteen year olds on twitter.

superb_dev 2y ago

> Well, the general 'Rewrite All in Rust' consensus is that it solves all general programming problems, ever. No, that’s not the consensus. This is a strawman.

timeon 2y ago

> Well, the general 'Rewrite All in Rust' consensus is that it solves all general programming problems, ever. This is obvious example of strawman. Why are you doing this?

PreInternet01 2y ago
Towards general mental health. I'm just a C# wage slave, and I'll admit, when being prompted, that my language, its vendor, its runtime environment, and its general approach are, to put it kindly, flawed. However, as evidenced by the arguments and voting in this thread, Rust proponents will take no criticism, whatsoever. I linked to a GitHub repository that documents many, many instances in which generally safe Rust causes UB. The same kind of UB that recently hit one of my coworkers, caused a 3-day outage and now (despite all my counseling to the contrary!) will burn them out permanently. My only request: can you guys please back off just a little bit? Programming is already hard enough without the purity wars you're stoking all the time...
- keybored 2y ago
  Stoking language flame wars based on hysterical exaggeration has never promoted mental health.
  - fargle 2y ago
    to be fair, from his perspective, it's often the rusty crowd who is stoking the flame wars - this sounds like a reaction to them. how often do we hear something like "C and C++ are horribly flawed and completely unsafe. it's basically a crime against humankind and gross negligence to use them"? i get weary of that kind of thing too. i wouldn't approach it by reacting in the same way as the GP comment, but i get it. and it's not really that much of a strawman. it's more exasperation and sarcasm. personally, i'm very interested in rust. but everytime someone at best "overhypes" it or at worse, outright dogs on other languages, it's a negative point toward dealing with the whole rust ecosystem.
    - 2y ago