Re:Why Rust?
by bluejekyll on Tuesday October 18, 2022 @12:44PM
(#33250235)
Yes, you’re correct trend is the wrong term. Was that an aggressive statement? It wasn’t intended to be.
I find the statements around unsafe in Rust to generally be incorrect though, from what I can tell, it’s only ever used in quite narrow cases and not generally across the vast majority of Rust software.
Have a look at Rust/WinRT where the Microsoft team is the opinion others should provide the safer wrappers on top.
Re:Why Rust?
by bluejekyll on Tuesday October 18, 2022 @08:04PM
(#33255755)
Isn’t that an FFI boundary though? There are a lot of examples of FFI crates where the inner FFI is wrapped by an outer safe crate with a Rust API.
Not having looked at that API specifically, it might be that they think there are perhaps different approaches to implementing the safe interfaces, and those may be best left to specific implementations for UI abstraction frameworks, like Druid.
Just speculating.
From your link: To get this plot I ordered all crates by unsafe code % and then plotted it, so each point on the graph is unsafe code % for a single crate.
The link is still some evidence in support of your position, given that it drops off close to the left edge, i.e., a small number of crates have a large amount of unsafe code. But it isn't nearly the smackdown of GP's position you must think it to be for you to be so aggressive toward them.