3 ms·
> I think this part answers your question. A novice could produce reasonably safe Rust code by just reading a book. That blend of comments is at best grasping
by motorest 1y ago
> I think this part answers your question. A novice could produce reasonably safe Rust code by just reading a book.
That blend of comments is at best grasping at straws. How long do you think a developer stays a "novice"? Does Rust have any problem that prevents developers from learning and improving their skills as fast as any other developers do? Are all Rust projects maintained by novice and junior devs where no one at all can claim to have any senior level skills?
If that's the best argument, that's not an argument at all.
- timeon 1y agoSo why all the software is still so insecure?
- motorest 1y ago[flagged]
- scott_w 1y ago> Doing this in C or C++ is possible, but the fact that even the best of the best programmers in these languages sometimes still make these mistakes shows the limitations of the paradigm. Look, I’m not the one making these arguments, I’m just pointing out that all your objections seem to have been answered already. If you have a counter argument that shows Rust, as practiced, is no safer than C++, then I’d like to see it.