4 ms·
It's a fine post except for this: > Countless companies have cited how they improved their security or the amount of reported bugs or memory leaks by simply re
by ergonaught 1y ago
It's a fine post except for this:
> Countless companies have cited how they improved their security or the amount of reported bugs or memory leaks by simply rewriting their C++ codebases in Rust. Now is that because of Rust? I’d argue in some small part, yes.
Just delete this. Even an hour's familiarity with Rust will give you a visceral understanding that "Rewrites of C++ codebases to Rust always yield more memory-safe results than before" is absolutely not because "any rewrite of an existing codebase is going to yield better results". If you don't have that, skip it, because it weakens the whole piece.
- mirpa 1y agoIt reminded me of Firefox attempts at rewriting part of C++ codebase and failing - because of C++ complexity; but succeeding later because of Rust https://blog.rust-lang.org/2017/11/14/Fearless-Concurrency-In-Firefox-Quantum/#stylo-a-parallel-css-engine https://blog.rust-lang.org/2017/11/14/Fearless-Concurrency-I...
- silon42 1y agoYeah... if you don't have 100% feature test coverage (and more) you will almost certainly lose features (aka cause bugs)