Re:Migrating from Go to Rust
by bottlepalm on Monday May 25, 2026 @03:40AM
(#48264405)
Safe? No compiler is going to catch badly designed code, or intentionally backdoored code. Memory leaks as well. Compilers are the ground floor of validation and the least of your problems with AI generated code.
A mythical compiler might catch unsafe code
Yes? Does that contradict anything I said?
If the program design follows the principle of making illegal states unrepresentable (credit to Yaron Minsky), the compiler can catch much, much more than most people realize.
The process of designing a program like that itself catches a lot of "badly designed code". And such a design also naturally exposes many kinds of intentional backdoors, because security properties can quite easily be statically checked. For example, IDORs can be made literally impossible in such a design.
In discussions like this, I'm reminded of the William Gibson quote, "the future is already here, it's just unevenly distributed."
I found it's the opposite. Thanks to LLM's whole classes of problems otherwise solved by using Rust are gone. It's now more important that the generated code is easy to read.
Relative to Go? I'm pretty sure your Go code won't be faster if you used LLMs. If you need that, Rust is still preferred.
Relative to C/C++? That'll be very interesting. Do you have some evidence that LLMs can create memory-safe code in C/C++? It'll be truly amazing if true, but given that they apparently struggle to create/maintain big codebases in already-memory-safe languages I seriously doubt it.
If the LLM gives you safe code you know there are entire classes of things you don't have to review for.
That said, I agree with you. My experience is that LLMs are great if you are highly competent in the domain in which you let them work. And it's probably easier to be competent in Go than in Rust.