News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Chrome 0-day exploit used in Operation WizardOpium by nicoburns on Saturday November 02, 2019 @08:10AM (#21427191)
Disagree on this. In Rust I can read most of the information I need to know straight from the function signatures. In Go I have to go through every line of code (and there are often a lot of lines due to Go's lack of expressive power).
Re:Chrome 0-day exploit used in Operation WizardOpium by lima on Saturday November 02, 2019 @08:12AM (#21427200)
In Rust code I audit, I typically have to jump through multiple layers of abstraction and cleverness, while Go code is straight forward and boring.
Re:Chrome 0-day exploit used in Operation WizardOpium by nicoburns on Saturday November 02, 2019 @08:37AM (#21427296)
I guess it's a matter of preference. If something is abstracted, then you only have to audit it once (and often you can count on someone else having audited it). With Go code, everything is new and unique, so there are a lot more opportunities to introduce bugs.
Re:Chrome 0-day exploit used in Operation WizardOpium by Quekid5 on Saturday November 02, 2019 @11:20AM (#21428165)
Not to be argumentative, honestly, that sound pretty laughable if you don't have an equivalent of an algebraic effect system (or similar).

A "function" in Rust can do a whole bunch of stuff that is not signaled by its type signature.

Re:Chrome 0-day exploit used in Operation WizardOpium by nicoburns on Saturday November 02, 2019 @02:04PM (#21429074)
Mutability / immutability is in the function signatures, and that goes a long way. It's not as good as an effect system of course. But along with global variables barely being a thing in Rust, it goes a long way to cutting out the common course of bugs.