71–80 of 606 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Rust (despite the common understanding) is not a memory-safe language in its entirety. It is a language designed to have a strict division of safe/unsafe which makes it easier for developers to compartmentalize code to achieve memory-safety.
Then even Java is not memory safe according to the implicit standard that you allude to here since one can use the `Unsafe` class.
Rust doesn't check for overflow in arithmetic operations in release mode so there are lot of opportunities to create vulnerabilities in Rust.
There is some important context missing from your comment here. At least two points anyway: In Rust, overflow is not undefined behavior (neither signed nor unsigned). Today, arithmetic wraps in release mode (panics in debug mode), but it may panic in release mode in the future. The other point is that, since overflow wraps, that may indeed result in logic bugs. And in theory that logic bug could be used to lead to ex…
I'll be downvoted for pointing out that comparing C++ with Rust without further context can be made into a false dichotomy. Some people are posting the article around the Internet as evidence that Rust solved security. Instead, there are many other memory safe languages around and there has been thousands in the past. Additionally, many security issues are not due to memory safety. Please keep that in mind when makin…
Can you link to anyone with any modicum of credibility declaring that this article is evidence that "Rust solved security"? I'll be the first to point out that memory safety related vulnerabilities are merely a subset (albeit a big one) of all possible vulnerabilities.
For me the biggest features of rust are: - great standard library, especially all the iter methods. having 'obscure' stuff like `try_for_each` just makes me so happy as a dev - unit tests built into the lang - tooling is great - docs are top notch The memory safety aspect is... sometimes helpful, sometimes irritating. I prefer zig solution (BYO allocator, special one for testing that reports errors) over rusts, which…
Rust does require structuring programs in a "Rust way" to avoid fighting with things it can't prove to be safe. However, I appreciate that Rust tries to achieve safety through improving program correctness, not merely crashing sooner. Of course Rust has run-time panics (hasn't solved the halting problem yet), but it also has many patterns catching problems at compile-time. For example, a hardened allocator can detect…
That was my concern that I had when I started learning the language. I think it is true, but I was surprised how quickly I managed to get used to the Rust way.
As an Android developer though, I have to be the one bitter old man yelling at cloud. I was spoiled by Java and Kotlin to the point where I cannot look at Rust and think it's a nice modern language.
Yes, I will start a language war today. Rust is like a truck driver who tried to make a race car that doesn't blow up. It's safe but it does not look refined. I wish you knew how weird Rust looks to me. I tried to learn it 3 times and had to give up after all the WTFs. I said it in the past, and I'll say it again:
* What the hell kind of language choice is to force everyone to type "#[derive(Debug)]" for annotations? I'd rather write past the end of an array and have someone steal my Bitcoin wallet than press "shift 3 bracket shift 9 shift 0 bracket" at the top of my structs. What's wrong with @? Nothing. @derive(debug). 2java4u? Ok, [derive debug] then.
* What's with the ' everywhere? Not the quote, the piece of dirt on your display. Why are our displays so dirty?
* Going for super short keywords "let", "fn", "mod", but then, "let mut" could have been "var". When is typing speed the bottleneck in writing software where you can't take the time to type out "module" or even 'function'? Come on now.
* print! now! fast! it's! a! macro! why! are! we! yelling!
* Passing "self" as the first argument was bullshit in Python, and it's bullshit in Rust too. Don't look at me like that - the compiler can inject it as the first parameter without requiring you to type it in.
* What does "::" do that "." can't? That's right. Nothing. All hail D.
D got language design right. Syntax better than Rust. CTFE better than Rust. Templates better than Rust. Marketing worse than Rust, though.
I'll try to learn Rust a 4th time now to stay relevant in the Android world, because I have bills to pay, but I want you to know that I blame each and everyone of you weirdos for not holding language designers to a higher bar.
Edit: if you downvote, reply with a link to the last compiler you wrote.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Rust (despite the common understanding) is not a memory-safe language in its entirety. It is a language designed to have a strict division of safe/unsafe which makes it easier for developers to compartmentalize code to achieve memory-safety.
Is there any practical programming language that is memory safe in its "entirety"? Python, for example, certainly is not. It has unsafe escape hatches (via ffi, at the very least). Yet, everyone I know of says and thinks of Python as a memory safe language. I do as well. > which makes it easier for developers to compartmentalize code to achieve memory-safety The problem here is that this is incomplete. Many many many…
I think it's fair to call Rust a memory safe language. But I don't think it's on the same tier as a fully managed language like python.
Nice: "it’s likely that using Rust has already prevented hundreds of vulnerabilities from reaching production"
The problem with Rust is the language syntax is ugly. It has a ton of visual noise. I think folks who write languages should have a typographer on their team because something like this: use std::collections::HashMap Is a typographic nightmare. While I understand “form follows function”, it’s tough to be excited to program in something like this.
For me the biggest features of rust are: - great standard library, especially all the iter methods. having 'obscure' stuff like `try_for_each` just makes me so happy as a dev - unit tests built into the lang - tooling is great - docs are top notch The memory safety aspect is... sometimes helpful, sometimes irritating. I prefer zig solution (BYO allocator, special one for testing that reports errors) over rusts, which…
What I like about this language is the crazy amount of creative and insightful discussions about language features and stabilization. It's because Rust hits the spot for MANY different domains and people. System programmers, functional programmers, backend, db engineers, GUI, devs from the formal verification/mission critical camp, OS devs, graphics and even frontend with WASM. For me personally, the thing I miss in…