Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2019 11:16:04 -0800 From: Enji Cooper <yaneurabeya@gmail.com> To: Igor Mozolevsky <igor@hybrid-lab.co.uk> Cc: Mark Blackman <mark@exonetric.com>, Hackers freeBSD <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Speculative: Rust for base system components Message-ID: <451787DE-0659-4F7D-B011-904F90866DDB@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CADWvR2hETR3j2=aNVGDiYfJeyeqgavDQOuxkxrE%2BVZFfD5BzJg@mail.gmail.com> References: <201901021829.x02IT4Kc064169@slippy.cwsent.com> <e954a12f-5d23-7a3f-c29b-c93e1250965c@metricspace.net> <361CCB81-AEB6-4EAC-9604-CD8F4C63948C@gmail.com> <CADWvR2ju7y_rcY3MFe_381yBmPXgm1BA7RzA9ZTUfTtCHdFGLw@mail.gmail.com> <6DF138FB-E730-477A-A992-8FE1944DDE94@exonetric.com> <CADWvR2hETR3j2=aNVGDiYfJeyeqgavDQOuxkxrE%2BVZFfD5BzJg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On Jan 3, 2019, at 12:24, Igor Mozolevsky <igor@hybrid-lab.co.uk> wrote: ... > And by what metric is that "safety" measured, how does one measure > "safety" objectively? To me, that sounds like a techie version of > virtue-signalling... Even the Rust-clan seem to be rather confused > about it: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nomicon/meet-safe-and-unsafe.html It=E2=80=99s pretty clear to me what the author means: rust features safe an= d unsafe extensions, much like C++, Java, Perl, python, tcl, etc. Generally s= peaking, =E2=80=9Cunsafe=E2=80=9D language features are those that require a= dditional care, like using malloc/free appropriately, avoiding global state,= locking resources as needed, etc. > Btw, Java is "safe" too, and it's been around for *much* longer! Not necessarily true. Are you aware of how native java extensions work? Java as a language was written to be generic/platform agnostic, however in o= rder to be useful, Java requires platform extensions. As such, Java supports= developers writing glue code in C/C++ (like python extensions), which can h= ave a host of potential issues with memory leaks, concurrency safety, etc, i= n addition to potential issues with security sandboxing and the like. With the number of zero-day bugs in java that have been in the language in t= he past few years, I don=E2=80=99t trust the language=E2=80=99s sense of saf= ety in terms of memory management and sandboxing in the JVM. Thanks, -Enji=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?451787DE-0659-4F7D-B011-904F90866DDB>