On 20/07/2019 19.10, Adam Mizerski wrote:
W dniu 20.07.2019 o 18:39, Darryl Gregorash pisze:
On 2019-07-20 06:34 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Apparently Microsoft is considering switching to Rust instead of C or C++, because it apparently avoids many memory related bugs that plague C/C++ programs. Firefox switched or is switching since 2016.
I wonder if Linux at large will do a similar move. The kernel I doubt it.
<https://www.zdnet.com/article/microsoft-to-explore-using-rust/>
If you consider this too offtopic, you can reply on the offtopic mail list.
Are those memory bugs due to compiler errors, or are they due to programmers too lazy to do things like checking for out-of-bounds memory references, or freeing up memory allocations once they are no longer needed?
Or maybe people even when they really pay attention sometimes make mistakes? Recently I wrote a big program in C++. Even though I used latest C++17 standard, followed all good practices I could remember and had a lot of unit test, I still had few (about 2 or 3) memory related errors. They were hard to find. I needed to recompile boost with valgrind support enabled. I needed to spend time trying to figure out where things go wrong. I felt I was wasting my time, because if I could use Rust (and I couldn't because of missing libraries) these errors would be caught by compiler.
That's the idea, yes.
So unless you are always writing error-free programs, stop using this "lazy developers" argument.
Indeed. Real life programmers make human mistakes. If we have computers with power to spare, maybe we should use langagues that make those errors impossible or at least most difficult. Me knows nothing about rust. But I'm curious. Maybe I should have a look. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 15.0 x86_64 at Telcontar)