Two Weeks of Rust

Re:Two Weeks of Rust by markque on Tuesday January 12, 2016 @06:35AM (#10886791)

How many people need to implement a lang runtime?, less than 0.0001% of all devs I would imagine. They can use C or C++ which has done the job for decades.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Two Weeks of Rust by fsloth on Tuesday January 12, 2016 @06:58AM (#10886877)

C and C++ has certainly kept people busy for decades.

There is a huge category of bugs related to sloppy fudge-factor-based programming. C++ has great tooling but it's a nightmare on an organizational scale. If I was building an engineering org and had no other alternative but C++ I would be in shambles worrying that no-one does anything horrible, no matter how good the engineers were.

I write C++ for my day job :)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Two Weeks of Rust by vardump on Tuesday January 12, 2016 @08:11AM (#10887167)

I write C/C++ for my day job too and 100% agree with you. I really hope Rust (or something else with similar promise, but I don't know any viable contenders) becomes viable quickly. Especially needed in firmware and kernel mode drivers.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Two Weeks of Rust by fiedzia on Tuesday January 12, 2016 @07:33AM (#10887006)

You can thank C/C++ for vast majority of software bugs. Billions of dollars and decades of productivity setback, and prognosis of fixing those issues for many years to come. All languages and tools that rely on people not making mistakes must die, the sooner the better.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Two Weeks of Rust by tarpherder on Wednesday January 13, 2016 @03:06AM (#10892933)

All tools and all languages rely on people not making mistakes to produce a working product. C/C++ just has a set of user created problems that can be particularly nasty to solve or deal with.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Two Weeks of Rust by fiedzia on Friday January 15, 2016 @04:21AM (#10908131)

The degree of this reliance varies greatly, and its better to choose tools that minimise or eliminate this. We can now do better then C, so let's kill it. Btw. just today OpenSSH got another buffer overflow found. One that exposes private keys.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Two Weeks of Rust by lionize on Tuesday January 12, 2016 @07:50AM (#10887068)

I disagree, all languages have the potential to be misused by poor programmers and it's the developer who is the source of the bug, the Linux kernel is written in C and is the most successful/widely used piece of software ever written largely due to the quality of the devs. Blaming a language for bugs or hoping new shiny one will stop a poor programmer for producing bugs is wishful thinking

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Two Weeks of Rust by fiedzia on Tuesday January 12, 2016 @08:04AM (#10887128)

> I disagree, all languages have the potential to be misused by poor programmers and it's the developer who is the source of the bug.

We can easily fix tools and processes, we will never fix people. Sure, all languages allow to create bugs, but some orders of magnitude more then others.

> kernel is written in C and is the most successful/widely used piece of software

end every release finds bugs in filesystem drivers, and buffer overflows and security issues and breaks display drivers. Seriously think of all the things kernel developers could do if they didn't waste years of work on tracking invalid pointers and off-by-one errors. Over and over and over again.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Two Weeks of Rust by pjmlp on Tuesday January 12, 2016 @08:07AM (#10887143)

Yep it shows.

https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-33/p...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Two Weeks of Rust by wtetzner on Tuesday January 12, 2016 @02:10PM (#10889596)

What a strange thing to say. You're saying we should never try to improve on C or C++? That sounds insane to me.

[ Parent | on HN ]