Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Cloudflare Makes Pingora Rust Framework Open-Source

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #71
    Originally posted by mdedetrich View Post

    And if the whitehouse would have hypothetically banned Rust you would be saying the exact opposite. Your just finding every excuse possible to justify your personal position.

    If that happened, I might had gotten interested in Rust.

    Originally posted by mdedetrich View Post
    This is one of the most major cause of security issues with C code (i.e. not checking input data) because that assumption usually turns out being wrong. Even if it is right at one point in time, software evolves due to requirements which then invalidates that assumption in the future.​
    Lol, you can always document if the input is checked or not. Maybe you are too stupid to write or read documentation.

    Comment


    • #72
      Originally posted by marios View Post
      Maybe you are too stupid to write or read documentation.
      Actually as is empirically clear, everyone is too stupid or write or read documentation since the same security bugs keep on happening even by the best programmers.

      Comment


      • #73
        Originally posted by mdedetrich View Post

        Actually as is empirically clear, everyone is too stupid or write or read documentation since the same security bugs keep on happening even by the best programmers.
        I'd say it's at least as much that even the best programmers have trouble coordinating without better synchronization primitives. Rust is a lockout-tagout system for programming.

        Comment


        • #74
          Originally posted by mdedetrich View Post

          What do you expect, you get bad faith arguments from C luddites. Even reading the comments on that blog post (which of course Volta didn't bother to do) show that the 2 pieces of code aren't even the doing the same thing i.e. Rust is doing a lot of input validation which C is missing.

          The hilariously ironic thing here given that its seems to be coming from someone who has experience in IOT/embedded, is that there are still valid reasons to use C in those environments because they have bespoke architectures/chips that Rust cannot target because they often need custom c compilers (although this is increasingly becoming less of an issue due to consolidation to ARM/RISC 5) but its NOTHING to do with what the blog author is stating.
          I agree that the argument in the blog is flawed but I didn't want to imply that the author intentionally used a bad implementation. He seems to have missed to link the source but a quick search gets to an extensive Rust blog post about the topic: https://www.embedded.com/c-is-alive-and-well/. Seems that he just copied and paste that snippet into their code. That's not an apples to apples comparison.

          Comment

          Working...
          X