Glibc getaddrinfo stack-based buffer overflow

Re:Glibc getaddrinfo stack-based buffer overflow by steveklabnik on Tuesday February 16, 2016 @03:12PM (#11112797)

Depending on what you're doing, it might even be faster, not 5-10% slower. We're currently sometimes faster, sometimes slower, but we should never be slower by a huuuuuge magnitude, though of course, bugs do exist.

I've been excitedly watching this over time; I think in a few years Rust could just be straight-up faster than C the majority of the time, depending.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Glibc getaddrinfo stack-based buffer overflow by EdSharkey on Tuesday February 16, 2016 @03:42PM (#11112982)

I think you're right with all the new opportunities for optimization in Rust.

I wanted to encourage developers to be open to compiled Rust being nowhere-near an order of magnitude slower than equivalent compiled C and still have it be an acceptable architecture choice for systems-programming.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Glibc getaddrinfo stack-based buffer overflow by steveklabnik on Tuesday February 16, 2016 @03:46PM (#11113008)

Absolutely. I think trading a bit of speed for a bit of safety is the right choice 99.99% of the time. I've just been excited to watch the benchmarks improve :)

[ Parent | on HN ]