News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:My Thoughts on the Bun Rust Rewrite by skydhash on Thursday July 09, 2026 @07:30AM (#48844180)
I’ve not seen any languages that does not require meticulous care to avoid runtime bugs. Type checking and lifetime ownership eliminate some, but not all of them.
Re:My Thoughts on the Bun Rust Rewrite by nicce on Thursday July 09, 2026 @07:43AM (#48844304)
> Type checking and lifetime ownership eliminate some, but not all of them.

They actually remove certain classes completely. E.g. lifetime ownership in Rust removes all bugs related to the reason why it is in the code syntax (a.k.a. lifetime markers remove use-after-free completely in Rust.)

Re:My Thoughts on the Bun Rust Rewrite by mungaihaha on Thursday July 09, 2026 @02:57PM (#48850771)
Almost like how RAII in C++ does it?
Re:My Thoughts on the Bun Rust Rewrite by nicce on Thursday July 09, 2026 @04:34PM (#48852011)
RAII in C++ is optional and not enforced everywhere. It certainly helps if you use it. In Rust you can't turn it off.
Re:My Thoughts on the Bun Rust Rewrite by mungaihaha on Friday July 10, 2026 @10:35AM (#48860592)
unsafe?
Re:My Thoughts on the Bun Rust Rewrite by fooster on Thursday July 09, 2026 @07:35AM (#48844230)
So less meticulous care then?
Re:My Thoughts on the Bun Rust Rewrite by skydhash on Thursday July 09, 2026 @11:38AM (#48847705)
Not really, as you always need to check back on your assertions, especially at the boundary points where information about types and ownership are more axiomatic than the result of logical inference.
Re:My Thoughts on the Bun Rust Rewrite by fooster on Monday July 13, 2026 @10:21AM (#48893181)
Sure, but there are less assertions to check. The surface area and boundaries are smaller and more limited.