4 ms·

Shitloads of already existing libraries. For example I'm not going to start using it for Arduino-y things until all the peripherals I want have drivers written

• littlestymaar 10mo ago
  Why? You can interact with C libraries from Rust just fine.
  • LtWorf 10mo ago
    But you now have more complexity and no extra safety.
    • timeon 10mo ago
      You have extra safety in new code.
    • pornel 10mo ago
      If you create wrappers that provide additional type information, you do get extra safety and nicer interfaces to work with.
    • dwattttt 10mo ago
      That's not really the case. Not all C APIs are inherently unsafe by construction, and I've always appreciated when someone has wrapped a C library and produced two crates: - a pure binding crate, which exposes the C lib libraries API, and - a wrapper library that performs some basic improvements Stuff in the second category typically includes adding Drop impls to resources that need to be released, translating "accepts pointer + len" into "accepts slices" (or vice versa on return), and "check return value of C call and turn it into a Result, possibly with a stringified error". All of those are also good examples of local reasoning about unsafety. If a C API returns a buffer + size, it's unsafe to turn it into a reference/slice. But if you check the function succeeded, you unsafely make the slice/reference, and return it from a safe function. If it crashes, you've either not upheld the C calls preconditions (your fault, check how to call the C function), or the C code has a bug (not your fault, the bug is elsewhere).