zlacker

[return to "“Rust is safe” is not some kind of absolute guarantee of code safety"]
1. Pragma+b8[view] [source] 2022-10-02 15:12:48
>>rvz+(OP)
I’ve been using Rust for a while, and I’m so, so tired of hearing this argument.

Yes, we know. We get it. Rust is not an absolute guarantee of safety and doesn’t protect us from all the bugs. This is obvious and well-known to anyone actually using Rust.

At this point, the argument feels like some sort of ideological debate happening outside the realm of actually getting work done. It feels like any time someone says that Rust defends against certain types of safety errors, someone feels obligated to pop out of the background and remind everyone that it doesn’t protect against every code safety issue.

◧◩
2. flohof+Wb[view] [source] 2022-10-02 15:35:06
>>Pragma+b8
> Rust is not an absolute guarantee of safety and doesn’t protect us from all the bugs.

That's not exactly the vibe I'm getting from the typical Rust fanboys popping up whenever there's another CVE caused by the usage of C or C++ though ;)

Rust does seem to attract the same sort of insufferable personalities that have been so typical for C++ in the past. Why that is, I have no idea.

◧◩◪
3. lucasy+Nc[view] [source] 2022-10-02 15:40:06
>>flohof+Wb
It protects against the leading 70 percent of CVEs, which are due to memory safety issues. This is all Rust has ever claimed to solve and it's all I've ever seen anyone cite when advocating for it.

If these people are insufferable to you, that I can't change your mind on. That said you might want to get used to it since major areas of industry are already considering C/C++ as deprecated (a paraphrasing from the Azure CTO recently)

◧◩◪◨
4. Test01+Md[view] [source] 2022-10-02 15:45:51
>>lucasy+Nc
I didn't know the Azure CTO was the CTO was the C++ community. I'm sure the billions of lines of code written in C++ for the finance industry would love to have a word.

The insufferable nature of the people isn't the advocating of safety. It's that Rust seems to have evolved a community of "X wouldn't have happened if Y was written in Rust!" and then walking away like they just transferred the one bit of knowledge everyone needed. They occupy less than 1% of the programming community and act like they single-handedly are the only people who understand correctness. It's this smug sense of superiority that is completely undeserved that makes the community insufferable. Not the safety "guarantees" of the language.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. lucasy+So[view] [source] 2022-10-02 16:43:57
>>Test01+Md
This is not the first time it's happened. JS is effectively deprecated in favor of TS in the hearts of programmers in that ecosystem. There was a lot of disagreement about this a decade ago, but TS is now at its 10 year anniversary and any serious project in that world should be written with static type definitions. It had the early adopters that were insufferable at the time, but they were right about the path and those that have jumped in are having a way better experience.

I think history will show that we can do a lot better than C/C++ and Rust is one of the best steps yet to show that. Rust will be replaced by something better some day and the cycle will repeat.

[go to top]