Re:RustBelt: securing the foundations of the Rust programmin...
by nercury on Sunday February 04, 2018 @01:15PM
(#16303958)
You have successfuly uncovered that Rust is a fundamentally different programming language, instead of a variation of the same. I feel that having learned Rust, any new language similar to Rust would have way lower learning curve. It is quite similar to the jump required from imperative to a funtional language. We may be missing a good name for a paradigm the Rust falls into.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:RustBelt: securing the foundations of the Rust programmin...
by nickpsecurity on Sunday February 04, 2018 @03:31PM
(#16304737)
Achieving Rust's safety in C took separation logic with the best tool probably being VCC from Microsoft. I encourage anyone that thinks the borrow checker is unnecessarily hard or alternative languages would be easy to try doing an existing Rust library or app in VCC with separation logic. Also, if applicable, ensure it passes soubd, static analysis to be free of any defects Rust's design would stop in that library that C doesnt.
Then you'll appreciate the work languages like Cyclone and then Rust save you. There's other models published and in development that might make the next one a bit easier. Yet, separation logic is the proper comparison to borrow checker and most programmers didnt try to learn it.