What an absolute shitshow

  • thingsiplay@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 hours ago

    No, it does not depend on what I do. In Rust it is by definition easier to write safe code than in C.

    • MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Sure does. If the tool was used for 50 years and 1000s times checked (also by criminals), your reimplementarion will not be safer for a whole while, memory safety or not. Especially with that huge scope.

      • thingsiplay@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        8 hours ago

        Ehm, thats not what I said? Let try me again: If you write code in C and in Rust, both spend about 5 years time and check them equally often, with equally amount of experience, then it is by default easier to write the safe code in Rust. Because Rust is safe by default.

        If you compare a new project to an old project, that has nothing to do with my statement.

          • thingsiplay@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 hours ago

            The statement I was referring to and answering to wasn’t in context. It was an absolute statement about the language itself:

            Rust is absolutely not faster or easier than C. It’s safer but that’s it.

            I am not suggesting that throwing decades old tested and developed code is immediately safer than rewriting it from scratch. Sometimes a rewrite (be it in same language or different) might result in better code, given time. But that is not what I was replying and discussing to.