News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Pitfalls of Safe Rust. Parent comment

Re:Pitfalls of Safe Rust by pjmlp on Monday April 07, 2025 @03:08AM (#43608672)
Many also need to learn that there are configuration settings on their compilers that make those two cases the same, enabling bounds checking on operator[]().
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Pitfalls of Safe Rust by criddell on Monday April 07, 2025 @07:54AM (#43610249)
Sure, but at() is guaranteed to throw an exception and operator[] can throw an exception when you go out of bounds. C++26 is tweaking this, but it's still going to differ implementation to implementation.

At least that's my understanding of the situation. Happy to be corrected though.

[ Parent | on HN ]