4 ms·
> Rust has a history of shipping serious bugs (see, floating point recently) For those of us who may be out of the loop, could you elaborate on these points?
by aw1621107 2y ago
> Rust has a history of shipping serious bugs (see, floating point recently)
For those of us who may be out of the loop, could you elaborate on these points?
- QuiEgo 2y agohttps://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/128271 https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/128271 This one was fun too: https://blog.rust-lang.org/2024/04/09/cve-2024-24576.html https://blog.rust-lang.org/2024/04/09/cve-2024-24576.html Basically, anything that gets a .1 or .2 type release. Also, shout out to the Rust community for maintaining and fixing issues quickly; not trying to pick on them, just trying to show some examples to show Rust is still young and very much a moving target.
- aw1621107 2y agoAh, optimizer bugs are fun. Does make me wonder how their error rates compares to that of the other major compilers. > This one was fun too: https://blog.rust-lang.org/2024/04/09/cve-2024-24576.html https://blog.rust-lang.org/2024/04/09/cve-2024-24576.html To be fair, that affected a bunch of other languages as well so Rust is in (questionably) good company there. I feel the need to keep your Rust install up to date might arguably be more ecosystem-dependent than anything to do with Rust itself. If stuff you're using requires a newer rustc then you don't have much choice but to upgrade, but if you're fine using something older and/or your dependencies keep support for older versions of rustc then you can probably get away with a lot fewer updates.