Подтвердите e-mail

Для публикаций, комментариев, реакций и сообщений подтвердите адрес.

←

Публикация

Предыдущая публикация
Alice ✨

i don't want to open this whole thing up again, but I think what really bothers me about the whole rust reaction to fil-c is that rust users have spent years arguing that the only important property is memory safety.

5181
Jenna JJ Q.

(dunno if i really wanna wade into this ...) fil-c seems really impressive, and I don't think I would have thought what it did was possible before it was done. but i also don't really wanna use it myself, I dislike C for reasons that go beyond UB, and I like rust for reasons that go beyond "safety"

Обсуждение

1 прямых ответов · 5 сообщений

Jenna JJ Q.

i also don't really see them as competitors? I mean, I'm not actually sure how fil-c positions itself, exactly, but I'd think the use case would be "I have some legacy C code and I really need to run it with some kind of assurance about its security"

Ответ для Jenna JJ Q.
Jenna JJ Q.

i like rust 'cause its type system makes it easy to reason about in a hard-to-pin-down-similar-but-not-quite-the-same-way as pure functional code is easy to reason about. and C isn't. the memory safety thing is just one of the more salient consequences

Ответ для Jenna JJ Q.
Jenna JJ Q.

i actually don't really know what the conflict is about so i have no idea what i just walked into

Ответ для Jenna JJ Q.
bushr

Tl;Dr creator of Zig announced they were gonna add memory safety by adopting the Fli-C approach as an optional ABI, and in that announcement they specifically said it would be "actually safe (unlike Rust)". With the further context being Bun's rewrite in Rust kicking off the whole "Zig vs Rust"...

Ответ для bushr
bushr

Zig has some cool ideas, Fil-C too, but I really like the specific niche Rust has carved for itself as being aimed at library authors more than just application developers. An OK language with amazing libraries will always beat a great language with bad libs.