4 ms·
> Anybody who thought the simple action of rewriting things in Rust would eliminate all bugs was hopelessly naive All bugs is typically a strawman typically on
by zamalek 10mo ago
> Anybody who thought the simple action of rewriting things in Rust would eliminate all bugs was hopelessly naive
All bugs is typically a strawman typically only used by detractors. The correct claim is: safe Rust eliminates certain classes of bugs. I'd wager the design of std eliminates more (e.g. the different string types), but that doesn't really apply to the kernel.
- samdoesnothing 10mo ago> All bugs is typically a strawman typically only used by detractors. The correct claim is: safe Rust eliminates certain classes of bugs. I'd wager the design of std eliminates more (e.g. the different string types), but that doesn't really apply to the kernel. Which is either 1) not true as evidenced by this bug or 2) a tautology whereby Rust eliminates all bugs that it eliminates.
- PartiallyTyped 10mo ago>> safe Rust > 1) not true as evidenced by this bug Code used unsafe, putting us out of "safe" rust.
- drob518 10mo agoI think the answer is #2, the tautology. But just because it’s a tautology doesn’t mean it’s a worthless thing to say. I think it’s also true, for instance (a corollary), that Rust eliminates more types of bugs than C does. And that may be valuable even if it does not mean that Rust eliminates all bugs.
- lelanthran 10mo ago> All bugs is typically a strawman typically only used by detractors. That's obviously not true; we've had years and years of "if it compiles it works" derailing C and C++ forums all over the internet.