Date: Sun, 8 Sep 2024 08:52:51 +0000 From: Paul Floyd <paulf2718@gmail.com> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: The Case for Rust (in any system) Message-ID: <9fea8629-87f7-46a1-ad33-06a82271cd79@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4634B979-4EB9-41AE-A9FE-14ACC9A4324A@iitbombay.org> References: <CAOtMX2iCNX5OkdeghnbmcMrO0UYWwm4zfxFSZGznOznu%2Bmh5rA@mail.gmail.com> <CAFYkXj=4Un-P-heT=GV%2B-B2gH0CX6Nq9KdM6ELwHED4qxiJVkQ@mail.gmail.com> <4634B979-4EB9-41AE-A9FE-14ACC9A4324A@iitbombay.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 05-09-24 20:21, Bakul Shah wrote: > On Sep 5, 2024, at 11:34 AM, Tomek CEDRO <tomek@cedro.info> wrote: >> >> wow! this is undeniable argument even for someone who opposes the idea (like me) :-) > > Not really! > > Showing that a present system has issues does not imply in any > way that a proposed new system (or major change) will fix the > said problems! This is a common fallacy that people fall for. > Many people. Many many people :-) I don't think that anyone is saying that we should stop the world and rewrite it in Rust (or C++). Herb Sutter (convenor of the C++ standard committee wrote a good article on this recently: https://accu.org/journals/overload/32/180/sutter/ Notable points - only 4 of of the top 12 CWEs are due to memory safety. - switching existing code to MSLs would need a magic wand and still wouldn't make all problems go away. - make good use of other tools like analyzers and sanitizers A+ Paul
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9fea8629-87f7-46a1-ad33-06a82271cd79>