News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Serious Chrome zero-day. Parent comment

Re:Serious Chrome zero-day by sanxiyn on Wednesday March 06, 2019 @11:56PM (#19325614)
Different standard library is kind of unavoidable because you need standard library interface understood by borrow checker.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Serious Chrome zero-day by pjmlp on Thursday March 07, 2019 @02:52AM (#19326293)
Microsoft already does that with their SAL annotations.

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/visualstudio/code-quality/u...

Which they are extending to also support their C++ lifetime checker.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Serious Chrome zero-day by zrm on Thursday March 07, 2019 @12:29AM (#19325752)
That's the compatibility-breaking part. Doesn't mean the replacement function or object can't have the same name, purpose, time complexity, etc.

You could potentially even continue to support the existing ones but regard them as unsafe and have the compiler warn if they're used.

[ Parent | on HN ]