alt Hacker NewsI don't get it. Are we reading the same article? This article is so generic that it reads like vacuous truth to me. But I don't see their bitterness towards Rust (or anything, really. It's just vacuous.) from it. Is this person a famous anti-rust'er or something?
Replies
I don't get how you dont't get. It links about memory safety (with a link towards an extremely biased article in Rust's favor) and a link to design to correctness (that leads to Zig project).
There is a lot to dislike about this paragraph:
It doesn’t matter that the language you use is memory-safe, if you didn’t design for correctness or have no process that will eventually lead you to fixing all bugs.
And no, asserts don't fix all bugs, they just guarantee some of your invariants are held at best, used in test at worst.
> It doesn’t matter that the language you use is memory-safe
> nobody can trick me into mistaking lesser stars for my true destination
The author seems to be in some level of denial around compile-time safety checks. They're right that runtime safety errors are an issue, but it feels wrong to discount compile time checkers when it can save a lot of yak shaving.
It's so bland and generic its bizarre like somebody is botting it. Weird that all the comments calling this out are getting flagged or downvoted.
But it links to this post
https://joshlf.com/posts/memory-safety-life-and-death/
Under a "it doesn't matter it's memory-safe if..."