Why Amazon is writing Firecracker in Rust? Why not C/C++?
1–8 of 8 posts
Re: Why Amazon is writing Firecracker in Rust? Why not C/C++?
#2Re: Why Amazon is writing Firecracker in Rust? Why not C/C++?
#3Because the Rust Evangelism Strike Force apparently got to them.
Re: Why Amazon is writing Firecracker in Rust? Why not C/C++?
#4Proven as easy to introduce bugs and vulnerabilities with.
Re: Why Amazon is writing Firecracker in Rust? Why not C/C++?
#5Re: Why Amazon is writing Firecracker in Rust? Why not C/C++?
#6> Why not C/C++ which are already proven Proven as easy to introduce bugs and vulnerabilities with.
I want to understand a compelling reason for yet another systems programming language ? I don't know Rust as of now, and the reason for Rust that I have heard often is the safety/security, but what I can most certainly say is that with this safety/security Rust must be compromising something that C++ is not.
Too many programming languages with same purpose will make life of a programmer too hard. Already tech scene is changing so fast, and yet another programming language will only make programmers more frustrated :-(
Re: Why Amazon is writing Firecracker in Rust? Why not C/C++?
#7> Why not C/C++ which are already proven Proven as easy to introduce bugs and vulnerabilities with.
So you mean to say program written in Rust by any programmer will bug free ? IMHO, lousy programmer will write lousy code ,irrespective of C, C++, Rust, Python.. What do you say ? I want to understand a compelling reason for yet another systems programming language ? I don't know Rust as of now, and the reason for Rust that I have heard often is the safety/security, but what I can most certainly say is that with this…
As for exactly which bugs (safe) Rust prevents, memory safety is one, but I'll let someone more knowledgeable answer - I'm sure they'll be along shortly.