afdbcreid

8 ms·

151.
by afdbcreid 5mo ago
Currently LLVM cannot do that because the panic message includes the erroneous index. You can do it manually though if you add `_ = tab[100]`. Even if the panic message would not include the index, LLVM was unable to do that if the previous
152.
by afdbcreid 5mo ago
The comparison here is to Go, which doesn't have any way to handle memory allocation failure AFAIK. In Rust you can do that (mostly on nightly although not only), and yes there are alternatives for this case, but it's rare anyway.
153.
by afdbcreid 5mo ago
Can you point out something that has a native Go library but not a native Rust counterpart? The only thing I can think of is cryptography. We do have ring, but the default in rustls today is aws-lc-rs.
154.
by afdbcreid 5mo ago
Relative to Go? I'm pretty sure your Go code won't be faster if you used LLMs. If you need that, Rust is still preferred. Relative to C/C++? That'll be very interesting. Do you have some evidence that LLMs can create mem
155.
A PR proposes to stabilize the Rust allocator API(github.com)
5 points by afdbcreid 5mo ago|0 comments
156.
by afdbcreid 5mo ago
Really not. You can, of course, having instead a delegate to evaluate the expression. But then that's all you can do. You can't pretty-print it, for example, or optimize it, or whatever.
157.
by afdbcreid 5mo ago
While we surely hope that at least some people will read and honor the policy, of course we know not everyone will. But creating a policy gives us teeth. Currently sending such PR is not disallowed, provided it doesn't fall in the thin
158.
by afdbcreid 5mo ago
No, you read incorrectly. Using LLMs to discover bugs is allowed given that you personally verified them.
159.
by afdbcreid 5mo ago
Note that there are currently several proposed policies (plus hundreds of discussions mostly in private channels), and frankly I'm not sure we'll ever reach a consensus (I'm a Rust project member).
160.
by afdbcreid 5mo ago
But what answer did they expect? A specific number or that it's UB?
161.
by afdbcreid 5mo ago
Nope, there is no sequence point in the middle and modifying an object more than once between sequence points is undefined behavior.
162.
by afdbcreid 5mo ago
They don't consider laying him off?
163.
by afdbcreid 5mo ago
Even assuming that's a correct interpretation, does "using C/C++ results in having an extremely high amount of crashes/memory bugs" not true?
164.
by afdbcreid 6mo ago
Ah. I believe pretty much every safe language on the planet constantly has bugs in the implementation that can be exploited to cause unsafety. Sometimes they even get CVEs, e.g. in JavaScript VMs.
165.
by afdbcreid 6mo ago
If we compare 1-to-1 indices to unsafe code, indices always win (assuming they are viable wrt. perf etc.). This is very simple: all else being equal, a mistake in unsafe code (can be) UB while a mistake in indices is at most a logic bug, an
166.
by afdbcreid 7mo ago
The `become` keyword changes behavior: it drops variables before the return.
167.
by afdbcreid 7mo ago
I partially agree, but even with stalebots nobody is measuring the maintainers' productivity. So when they made the choice to use stalebots, they did that because they believe that's best for the project. It's different from
168.
by afdbcreid 7mo ago
Because I have a reason to believe it's fixed, I have many more like it and it's difficult to reproduce. Simple :)
169.
by afdbcreid 7mo ago
As an open source maintainer, I feel that statement is really unfair. Yes, we do sometimes close bug reports without evidence they are fixed. But: - We owe you nothing! And the fact that people still expect maintainers to work for them is
170.
by afdbcreid 7mo ago
There are two reasons this logic is incorrect. 1. It's not Iran's mercy, but deterrence. If Iran was to target critical infrastructure constantly, Israel and the U.S. would bomb its much more easily. Both sides currently avoid doi
171.
by afdbcreid 8mo ago
There is no .NET Framework 5. .NET Core 5 is just .NET 5.
172.
by afdbcreid 8mo ago
ChatGPT claims that the same or similar root does exist in the meaning "bird" or "to fly" in a lot of other Semitic languages. Interestingly, it also claims that there is some correspondence in Hebrew, in the noun תור (t
173.
by afdbcreid 8mo ago
As a Hebrew speaker I cannot understand how you came into this conclusion. The closest I can think of is ת-י-ר, which is the root of being in a trip.
174.
by afdbcreid 9mo ago
You'd be surprised to see, after deep inspection, how little of Rust you can remove while keeping its safety story the same (that is, memory safe without GC). Traits? Nope. We need some way for code reuse. Classes cannot be made memo
175.
by afdbcreid 9mo ago
If Anthropic can't use a really simple API separation and rate-limit only one it's really on them.
176.
Bad Apple but it's played with cargo compilation output(old.reddit.com)
4 points by afdbcreid 10mo ago|0 comments
177.
by afdbcreid 10mo ago
I think GP is saying that if the attackers can push an update it will be scary.
178.
by afdbcreid 10mo ago
The only things in Rust that are real statements are `let` statements, and item statements (e.g. declaring an `fn` inside a function). All other statements are in fact expressions, although some always return `()` so they're not really
179.
by afdbcreid 10mo ago
I don't know a single mainstream language that uses parser generators. Python used to, and even they have moved. AFAIK the reason is solely error messages: the customization available with handwritten parsers is just way better for the
180.
by afdbcreid 10mo ago
Rust is susceptible to segfaults when overflowing the stack. Is Rust not memory safe then? Of course, Go allows more than that, with data races it's possible to reach use after free or other kinds of memory unsafety, but just segfaults

More ›