“Rust’s compiler prevents common bugs” So does skill. No offense to you, but, this trope is getting so tiresome. If you like the language then go ahead and use it. What is it with the rust crowd that they have to come acrosslike people trying to convert your religion at your front door?

  • smiletolerantly@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    122
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    3 days ago
    • if your skill is so great that you would never cause the kinds of bugs the rust compiler is designed to prevent, then it will never keep you from compiling, and therefore your complaint is unnecessary and you can happily use rust
    • if you do encounter these error messages, then you are apparently not skilled enough to not use rust, and should use rust

    In summary: use rust.

    • F04118F@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      I don’t agree with /u/red-crayon-scribbles ’ approach to memory safety, but what you’re saying isn’t entirely true either.

      It is possible to manipulate memory in ways that do not conform to Rust’s lifecycle/ownership model. In theory, this can even be done correctly.

      The problem is that in practice, this leads to the following, many of which were committed by some of the most highly skilled C developers alive, including major kernel contributors:

      https://xeiaso.net/blog/series/no-way-to-prevent-this/

      • Midnitte@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        3 days ago

        …echoing statements expressed by hundreds of thousands of programmers who use the only language where 90% of the world’s memory safety vulnerabilities have occurred in the last 50 years, and whose projects are 20 times more likely to have security vulnerabilities.

        ooof.

    • jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      3 days ago

      it always astounds me how utterly arrogant people are about their own abilities. (myself included) but seriously who the fuck doesnt like having something that just prevents you from doing things that are obviously broken and not going to work?

    • Decq@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      This so true, every one complaining that the borrow checker is annoying isn’t apparently aware what they used to do was inherently flawed. Sure there a some, though rare, false positives. But they are easily mitigated. These people are exactly that what they themselves are complaining about, elitist.

      • smiletolerantly@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        3 days ago

        Yeah. Once you get used to the (verbose, but by no means unergonomic!) syntax, you’ll probably never be happy with another language again. Job-wise, I am currently mostly using Go, and while also a nice language, I miss the confidence and security I took for granted with rust.

        Not to mention just how goddamn expressive rust can be. Let bindings like if ok/err, else return? Assign from a match on Some(Ok(x))? Filter, map, and friends on any iterator? Oh my GOD the error handling with the question mark iterator? 100% confidence that if it compiles, no error, possible null value, or case is unhandled.

        And all this WHILE giving you the amazing security benefits!

        Ah, damn, caught me proselytizing again.