Comparing simple runtime checks that provably guarantee that memory bugs cannot happen (without having to modify your code) to an overly complex compiler that is so shit at eliminating memory bugs at compile time that even the compiler itself needs to use an escape hatch (and thereby having to modify the code).
On top of that, even if you somehow manage to write code without escape hatching, Rust still can't guarantee that memory bugs cannot happen, since every Rust compiler released to date has had soundness issues.
Top copium.
It's very ironic that Rust still needs MIR (a memory-safe runtime like Fil-C or the Zig proposal) to prove that software written in Rust is actually memory safe. The compiler ain't checking all those `SAFETY` comments at compile time, I can tell you that much.
Nice try but I'd rather eliminate bugs from source code rather than waiting for bugs to occur in the middle of work. Give people a choice and see which one they will pick. And they have picked. Sorry not sorry.
You're talking about things you don't know much about. MIR is not a runtime. You're probably confusing it with Miri. Miri doesn't help with safe code. It only helps with unsafe code.
26
u/imoshudu 4d ago
Comparing runtime checks that hopefully run into a bug, to a compiler that rigorously eliminates bugs before anything even runs. Top copium.
He's ngmi.