I'm not against the Rust programming language, I don't really mind it, to be honest, but I don't think all the memory safety in the world is going to help you if you push bad code to production or if your software doesn't follow the most basic design principles.

Are Rust rewrites inherently a bad thing? I'm sure there's people who would want me to make that case, but I think software rewrites are value neutral, really. If you do a good job at it and it makes an old utility more maintainable, then sure, go for it; but if you are going to (re)write critical software from the ground up in any programming language, ask yourself if what you are doing is a toy or personal project, or if it's going to actually replace the original program in serious applications.

If you are rewriting something, I think it's a reasonable standard for your software to be as stable (and feature complete, ideally) as the thing you are you are trying to replace before you switch over to it.
Follow

@astra yeah the recent Cloudflare outage was the result of some bad rust code. Even if the language paradigm gives you all the right tools, there's always a way to break guarantees with the equivalent of an "I know what I'm doing, discard the constraints" function that wasn't written by someone who knew what they were doing. You don't even have to get to using unsafe blocks to run into this, just abusing the structures meant to guarantee safety is enough.

Most ML-inspired languages with an "Option" or "Maybe" type that can contain Some(x) or None have a "get me the x or immediately start erroring" footgun convenience function, for example.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Pixietown

Small server part of the pixie.town infrastructure. Registration is closed.