3 ms·
Memory leaks are by far the least interesting class of defect that Rust helps with - leaking memory is safe.
by eptcyka 1y ago
Memory leaks are by far the least interesting class of defect that Rust helps with - leaking memory is safe.
- genter 1y agoUntil the kernel kills you for being OOM.
- scotty79 1y agoProgram that no longer runs is the safest.
- aquariusDue 1y agoFor true safety we must prevent it from being written in the first place /s
- dmit 1y agoThat's the true meaning of backward compatibility. The [backward] refers to the time scale.
- drivingmenuts 1y agostomps butterfly I've just saved untold generations from certain calamity. ** 6,000,000 years later ** Butterfly King: This chimpanzee-descended motherfucker ….
- YZF 1y agoThat's still safe. EDIT: Safe in the sense you're not writing into memory you don't own, e.g. write after release, buffer overflows etc.
- airstrike 1y agoI'll add that even safety itself is not the sole reason why some people prefer Rust. There's a lot to Rust besides that and sometimes it's not about memory safety as much as it is about steering you into patterns Rust devs perceive as better overall.
- jayd16 1y agoPossible attack vector, though.
- andrewflnr 1y agoThe least interesting attack vector. You can fix it by rebooting.
- Arnavion 1y agoAnd in fact is not even something that Rust does differently from C++. Memory releases in Rust are handled by dtors just like they are in C++. What a weird article. (The only difference is that Rust defaults to moving while C++ defaults to copying, and Rust moves don't leave a moved-out object behind while C++ does, so the dtors in Rust are simpler and called fewer times than the equivalent C++ code.)
- dmit 1y agoYes, the only difference.