Both are correct in their own way. The craziness is UB.
A huge of Rust is "you're holding it wrong" is considered a language bug.
Hot take: Rust isn't as hard as it's detractors think it is, and it isn't as easy as we want it to be. But I think we have a better chance of becoming easier to use than easier use languages becoming lower level without compromises.
I think Rust being difficult is like saying you had good parents because they let you play with knives. Rust may seem hard at first but borrowck is just looking after you.
To elaborate writing a fast and memory safe multi-threaded webserver is easy in Rust; if it compiles it works, but difficult in C since while it may be easier to get it to compile it might not work correctly.
the strains of the project have hurt a lot of people over the years and I think maybe the only path to recovery involves getting some distance from it.
He devoted his talk to not trolling,
"That's enough about languages that suck, let's talk about C++" - Miguel Young de la Sota speaking on Rust's handling of Pin before talking about C++ at RustConf 2021
It's nice to be quoted on TWiR.
But is that intended to be an example of a newbie mistake or bad practice? Or the opposite.
I got a chuckle out of the following visualization:
ZiCog's former employer: They copy pasted our code. ZiCog: They used JS. We use Rust. Judge: Case closed.
EDIT: I am not a lawyer. The above is not legal advice. If you are in ZiCog's situation, consult a lawyer.
Except they accused us of having run away with the code for an entire project, which we were picking up from an existing customer. And of not delivering it to them, after we had and they had not paid us or the office rent for months.
I was inspired by the story of Compaq and others clean room reverse engineering the IBM PC BIOS so that they could make PC clones without stealing the original BIOS code. So I was looking to start over with a new language, I had only then discovered Rust and soon decided to bet the farm on it. It's been working very well.
"Case closed". Well, we have not heard back from them... yet.
Luckily my partner's girl friend is a well qualified commercial lawyer
Rust maybe “multi-paradigm general-purpose programming language” but it's also incredibly opinionated and tries very hard to stir you toward “great APIs” (good APIs are easy to use, great APIs are hard to abuse).
I think just maybe not "incredible opinionated" but the last words seemed nice.
Succintly put , this is sometimes overlooked.
Do you want to know what was harder than learning lifetimes? Learning the same lessons through twenty years of making preventable mistakes.
"All applications that can be (re)written in Rust will eventually be (re)written in Rust" - Riemer's law
Posted on Mastodon.
See Atwood's law for context.
Twitter surfaced this and I couldn't help but to nominate this tweet
They go on to say:
i lived in a glorious ivory tower of algorithms and datastructures, absolutely refusing to think about what the fuck was in std::fs, even while i was literally on the team that ostensibly maintained it
now my tower is in ruins, i know what an OpenOptions is, alas, i am no more
i must soothe my burns with the knowledge that i still have absolutely no idea what is in std::net
although even that is ash in my mouth knowing i was also forced to actually write the word "async" like a coward and a fool
Rust really turned me on to the idea that there are actually two places to put data of indeterminate length: space (heap), and time (iterators, write-APIs)