“Rust is safe” is not some kind of absolute guarantee of code safety

Re:“Rust is safe” is not some kind of absolute guarantee of ... by greyhair on Monday October 03, 2022 @10:43AM (#33068173)

> Most code written in C is horribly unsafe.

I think that is untrue. I worked at the Network Systems arm of Bell Labs for sixteen years, and we could demonstrate five-nines of uptime on complex systems written entirely in C.

C is a rough tool, I will grant you that, and Rust is a welcome addition to the toolkit, but saying that most code written in C is horribly unsafe, does not make it true.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:“Rust is safe” is not some kind of absolute guarantee of ... by paoda on Monday October 03, 2022 @11:57AM (#33069309)

Perhaps I misunderstand, but I don't imagine most individuals or companies writing production C code to be on the same "level of competency" as a research company as prestigious as Bell Labs.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:“Rust is safe” is not some kind of absolute guarantee of ... by pjmlp on Monday October 03, 2022 @03:14PM (#33072278)

UNIX was found to be less secure than Multics, thanks to the additional safety guarantees provided by PL/I type system.

https://www.acsac.org/2002/papers/classic-multics.pdf

So not even back then.

[ Parent | on HN ]