5 ms·
You'll be surprised by the amount of features that are often proposed by random people and are then rejected by the Rust community. Rust is definitely not tryin
by SkiFire13 2y ago
You'll be surprised by the amount of features that are often proposed by random people and are then rejected by the Rust community. Rust is definitely not trying to add all possible features, though you might get that feeling when you look at some feature like GATs and TAITs without having a clear idea of what problems they solve.
Also, Zig might be a nice modern language, but it is not an option if you're aiming for memory safety.
- pa7ch 2y agoI think any replacement for c/c++ will not be strictly safe from memory safety vulnerabilities, but I think both Rust and Zig go far enough to effectively nearly eliminate that entire class of vulns in production software. Rust achieves further memory safety than most with its borrow checker but in many cases that seems to be more about safety from crashing than vulns. For example, Go is not memory safe under concurrency, but there have been no memory safety vulns related to its concurrency ever. One could also argue Rust's unsafe blocks will be harder to reason about bugs in than Zig code. And if you don't need any unsafe blocks it might not be an application best suited to Zig or Rust.
- pas 2y agoGAT solves typing problems (by making a subset of HKT possible)