←back to thread

239 points ivankra | 5 comments | | HN request time: 0.639s | source
1. enricozb ◴[] No.45946070[source]
It carries some weight, very roughly in the direction of formal verification. Since (assuming there isn't any unsafe), a specific class of bugs are guaranteed to not happen.

However, this repo seems like it uses quite a bit of unsafe, by their own admission.

replies(2): >>45946679 #>>45947353 #
2. phplovesong ◴[] No.45946679[source]
I mean if i care about safety that much i would just write the damn thing in ATS. Rust has too many escape hatches to be safe anyway.
replies(1): >>45947860 #
3. ptravers ◴[] No.45947353[source]
There's a lot of unsafe in this at least. hard to be both safe and fast.
replies(1): >>45950136 #
4. Pfeil ◴[] No.45947860[source]
You never have only one requirement to satisfy. For example, if you'd welcome a certain amount of contributors, your language should be something people know or people like to learn. And of course it may just be the mood of the initiator, which I find completely fine.

Personally I find rust projects very inviting. Figuring out the amount of unsafe code is easy with grep/rg (to a certain degree), the project structure is pretty standardized, etc. All of this makes even a complex project relatively easy to start with. At the same time, the language is pretty usual (C-like and readable). I understand people like it, and writing "written in rust" is a good call for those people, I guess.

"Written in JS" would communicate something else than "written in D" or "written in C++". It communicates a lot of things implicitly.

5. shepherdjerred ◴[] No.45950136[source]
From the README:

> Compacting garbage collector, written in very unsafe Rust