Autocheck To Check If Your C++ Code Is Safe For Automobiles & Safety Critical Systems

[Nth_man]

> every Rust developer I've ever seen produces more working code, faster, than every C++ developer I know.

I have seen the opposite. [...]

Static Analyzer Rudra Found over 200 Memory Safety Issues in Rust Crates.
Developed at the Georgia Institute of Technology, Rudra is a static analyzer able to report potential memory safety bugs in Rust programs. Rudra has been used to scan the entire Rust package registry and identified 264 new memory safety bugs.

CVEs (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures) in Rust programs:

https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=rust

Weasel

"If I programmed in Rust, would I need a sound static analyzer?
Yes, the advantages of a sound static analyzer are needed for reasons that are similar to those in the C or C++ case. A C++ borrow checker (or a Rust one) does not bring the aforementioned advantages."

[bountykiller]

Or, instead of a probably buggy checker, one just uses an actually memory safe language to start with? Just an quality automotive thought ;-)

Sounds like a band-aid for something broken (C++), better use a real solution such as Rust instead.

I seriously don't understand why people who hate rust do so.

As far as I can see the problems comes from the rust developers whose first reaction was to reject this new tool just because it's not about their favorite language.

As C++ developer, I hardly understand why some developers prefer to use C while C++ can offers them more safety (C and C++ are really different in that regards).
Still, it's not a reason to comment about C tools with responses like the above ones.

In the end, everyone is free to use the tools and the languages they want.

[Daktyl198]

And will remain the case until C++ is displaced. The spacecraft reaching the moon travelled a lot faster than 80mph and was written in an even less safe collection of languages. Specialized tools are just one part of the pipeline for a decent software development process.

The proof is in the pudding and since Rust is still very young, it has a lot to prove. In time I am sure it will do well but you and I were born a century too soon to see it.

I'm not sure where you are getting this idea that we're too young to see Rust used anywhere. Literally every major company (in the US at least) started using Rust on their backend code years ago. Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Cloudflare, Dropbox, banks even. The Linux kernel is allowing drivers written in Rust. Microsoft is shipping rust code in the Windows kernel literally right now. Rust is *already* everywhere around you, you just pretend not to see it.

[Daktyl198]

As far as I can see the problems comes from the rust developers whose first reaction was to reject this new tool just because it's not about their favorite language.

As C++ developer, I hardly understand why some developers prefer to use C while C++ can offers them more safety (C and C++ are really different in that regards).
Still, it's not a reason to comment about C tools with responses like the above ones.

In the end, everyone is free to use the tools and the languages they want.

I agree. I love Rust, but I also actively use .NET 8 because I like that language too. I'm also interested in trying out Zig soon. Rust fanboys can take it too far, but I feel like Rust haters are the same way (have one language they like, and shun all the rest... and Rust just tends to be the one brought up most often). I always say to use the tool that fits the job. And if you can't or don't want to learn a new tool, then you don't have to. But you shouldn't complain about other people choosing to use the new tool.

[kpedersen]

I'm not sure where you are getting this idea that we're too young to see Rust used anywhere.

No. I was quite clear.

We are too *old* to see Rust really take off. It wont happen in our lifespan. The industries are too firmly based on C and we will all be dead before this substantially changes.

If you are born in space year 2050, then maybe you would be alive to see a change...

[Jumbotron]

The only correct and viable output that this program should spit out is....

PASS or NO PASS : " NO PASS "

REASON : " C and / or C++ code has been detected. Please use generally recognized safe languages for this use case. Re-test when a generally recognized safe language has been used. "

" Thank you "

" END TEST "

[Daktyl198]

No. I was quite clear.

We are too *old* to see Rust really take off. It wont happen in our lifespan. The industries are too firmly based on C and we will all be dead before this substantially changes.

If you are born in space year 2050, then maybe you would be alive to see a change...

Man, you are blind as a bat, Not only can you not see Rust used literally everywhere around you, you also can't read. You should get your prescription updated.

[jaypatelani]

Toyota already using Ada/Spark https://www.adacore.com/press/toyota...igh-reliabilit

[kpedersen]

Rust used literally everywhere around you

Sure...

[Jumbotron]

For God's sake just use ADA. It's LITERALLY battle tested safety critical in DoD/Military use cases ( American armed forces that is ). It has long met programming by contract specs. It's based on and in some people's perception a superset of Pascal with some tasty bits of Modula 2, C++, Smalltalk and even Java since the ADA 95 spec and the ADA 2005 spec. You want to write an ADA program as structured code...cool. You want to write it as objected oriented...cool. You want to write it as functional...cool. You want to write it as imperative...cool. All the above...cool.

And 50 years from now when it's still being run and some grandchild of one of the management team that headed up the program that created said ADA program for some auto manufacturer gets the contract to take the original code and debug it and / or add to it, any code monkey including him or her can easily read the code and know what's going on even if they are still pushing out Java or Javascript grads in the year 2075.