News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Show HN: RustyBox – a Busybox fork written in Rust by namewasmypw on Thursday November 14, 2019 @05:50PM (#21540377)
`unsafe` is already very prevalent in the ecosystem and this is a big point of contention.

https://github.com/actix/actix-web/issues/289

Re:Show HN: RustyBox – a Busybox fork written in Rust by arghwhat on Thursday November 14, 2019 @06:00PM (#21540453)
This would be anecdotal, and caused massive stir in the community when it was realized.
Re:Show HN: RustyBox – a Busybox fork written in Rust by beatgammit on Thursday November 14, 2019 @06:20PM (#21540616)
And a lot of the usages were promptly fixed when people made a stink about it.
Re:Show HN: RustyBox – a Busybox fork written in Rust by jturpin on Thursday November 14, 2019 @06:50PM (#21540866)
It was only fixed when a fuzzer showed a lot of vulnerabilities. Up until then the attitude was "stop demonizing unsafe, we know what we're doing."
Re:Show HN: RustyBox – a Busybox fork written in Rust by cogman10 on Thursday November 14, 2019 @07:07PM (#21540997)
I don't know about those particular authors. However, the vibe I get from the rust community as a whole is "unsafe is where dragons lay". Most, I'd say, treat it just like inline asm in C++. Sometimes a necessary evil, but not something you should be in the habit of using.
Re:Show HN: RustyBox – a Busybox fork written in Rust by nicoburns on Thursday November 14, 2019 @07:20PM (#21541078)
Actix is currently popular, but only because the rest of the ecosystem has been waiting for `async-await`, and taking a slow-and-steady approach to getting things right. I'd expect Actix's popularity to take a dramatic downturn right about when Rocket releases a async version that runs on stable Rust.