From BeepingComputer.

    • AggressivelyPassive@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      52
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      But it’s harder and easier to spot.

      You’ll never be 100% safe, but a proper lock is better than a “plz no steal” note.

    • baseless_discourse
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Yes, it was just discovered on this year’s POPL that rust’s type system is not sound with respect to deadlock freedom.

      https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3571229

      (of course this is not arguing that everyone should stay on C or CPP, just confirming the point that Rust will allow stupid things.

    • lloram239@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Dumb stuff in Rust has to be explicitly marked with unsafe. Meaning if you review the code you have to focus on only a couple of lines instead of the whole project.

      You can of course still write lots of other bugs in Rust, but C-style buffer overflows are impossible in Rust, which eliminates the majority of security issues.