News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Rust-style resource management in OCaml by catnaroek on Friday March 16, 2018 @11:26AM (#16601293)
> In Modula-3 or D, as as possible examples, a solution might be destructors or scope attributes.

These still allow you to mismanage resources.

> The only way to actually be 100% safe would be if everyone would be programming with formal logic,

Indeed. In order to construct a correct program, you also need to construct the logical argument that establishes its correctness. So, yes, you have to use formal logic.

> which still requires a lot of research to make it approachable by the average developer.

s/research/education/

You raise the craftsman to the level the craft requires, not lower the craft to the level of an apprentice.

Re:Rust-style resource management in OCaml by pjmlp on Saturday March 17, 2018 @02:55AM (#16605889)
> These still allow you to mismanage resources.

True, I didn't say the solution was perfect, but it is good enough for most devs.

> You raise the craftsman to the level the craft requires, not lower the craft to the level of an apprentice.

Nice goal, but I doubt you would manage to achieve that to anyone doing enterprise CRUD apps, mobile apps, games, ... to bother one second to learn TLA+, Idris, Coq or similar, unless their jobs depend on it.

Re:Rust-style resource management in OCaml by catnaroek on Saturday March 17, 2018 @02:10PM (#16608222)
The original post to which you replied begins with:

> As I said before, resource management is first and foremost a matter of correctness, so performance is neither here nor there.

Your proposed alternatives, namely:

> In Modula-3 or D, as possible examples, a solution might be destructors or scope attributes.

merely offer automation, not verification. Automation without verification simply makes screw-ups harder to undo.