Re:The Case for Rust in the base system
by nocombination on Sunday January 21, 2024 @03:50PM
(#39082897)
It's not what you program in that matters—it's how you test and ensure quality results.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:The Case for Rust in the base system
by littlestymaar on Sunday January 21, 2024 @04:05PM
(#39083062)
The amount of budget and time you have for the all project is finished, and in practice it's much easier for management to skip testing and QA than to reduce the scope of the project / the amount of features.hence the terrible quality that's plaguing this entire industry.
Re:The Case for Rust in the base system
by kstrauser on Sunday January 21, 2024 @04:36PM
(#39083326)
I like that Rust tests my code as I write it.
Looks for lollipop...
That's stupid the language you write in has a huge effect on how you test and ensure quality results. They aren't separate things.
E.g. at one end of the spectrum you have Python where you have to write explicit tests for typos and type errors.
At the other end of the spectrum you have formal verification languages like Dafny that may not require any tests to be written.
Rust is somewhere in-between. It has a very strong type system and lots of features that make memory errors and business errors less likely than in most other languages. You still need some tests, but not as many as with C/C++, Python, JavaScript, etc.
Re:The Case for Rust in the base system
by yencabulator on Monday January 22, 2024 @02:13PM
(#39093957)
It's really hard to test for security.
It's much more feasibly to be secure by construction.