News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on OpenSSL Security Advisory. Parent comment

Re:OpenSSL Security Advisory by omginternets on Thursday September 22, 2016 @11:23AM (#12557453)
What are the sacrifices being made by, say, Rust?

I'm only superficially familiar with Rust, but my understanding was that it was basically "C with strong memory guarantees". I naively thought that its entire purpose was to avoid such trade-offs.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:OpenSSL Security Advisory by vvanders on Thursday September 22, 2016 @01:54PM (#12558698)
Certain things(circular structures) are harder to represent without dropping down to unsafe code(which is a C equivalent security model).

It's a bit more upfront work to satisfy the compiler but I've found the payoff in debugging memory issues to be completely worth it.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:OpenSSL Security Advisory by omginternets on Thursday September 22, 2016 @02:07PM (#12558807)
Right, so then it is a net advantage over C, with the (negligible) trade-off of compiler-wrangling. The parent comment seemed to suggest the contrary.
[ Parent | on HN ]