Is it too petty to nominate "I am aware of existence of C/C++ but those have old man smell" from /u/oiledupcucumber on What I like about rust : rust
A couple of issues with that:
It's blatantly ageist.
Most developers of the C++ language are by no means old.
Just because a thing is old does not not mean it's bad. Pythagoras theorem is still a great thing is it not?
All in all a pretty poor argument in favour of Rust. Rust has much better ways to make its case.
I think you are missing the point. The quote is about C and C++ being superseded by Rust. It's not against any person or group, and you have to interpret in its own context, which was given by the linked thread. Rust brought new developments to systems programming that cannot be retrofitted to C and C++, and that's a pretty damn good argument in favor of it.
But quotes are, by definition, taken out of context. Thus, regardless of how good it is in context, it's of questionable suitability for a QOTW.
I learned long ago, never to wrestle with the Rust compiler. You get dirty, and besides, the compiler likes it.
Meanwhile the Rust shop has covers on everything and tag-out to even change settings of the multi-axis laser cutter, but you get trusted with said laser cutter on your first day, and if someone gets hurt people wonder how to make the shop safer.
Rust would be better if it were written in Rust.
"Aha, but std still has a libc dependency -"
"But the syscalls are still implemented in C -"
"But what about disk controllers, and firmware, and drivers, and everything else? Surely there isn't some way to completely avoid C?"
This is thanks to Lina's phenomenal efforts. She took a gamble writing the kernel driver in Rust, knowing it would take longer to get to the first triangle but believing it would make for a more robust driver in the end. She was right.
A few months of Lina's Rust development has produced a more stable driver than years of development in C on certain mainline Linux GPU kernel drivers.
I think... I think I have Rust envy
....Or maybe just Lina envy
Regarding the friction you feel when writing embedded Rust in the same way you wrote embedded C++...
A fun little jab and hat tip to the Rust community...
I'm expecting this article to make the rust crew go in a crusade again, and I think I might be with them this time.
On appreciating explicitness in code:
To date, there have been zero memory safety vulnerabilities discovered in Android’s Rust code.
Or maybe this one:
Safety measures make memory-unsafe languages slow
Strongly seconded, and I'd even suggest potentially highlighting the article even more than just another link in the link section.
For the quote, I think it's even more powerful to include the context directly following in the same article that
Based on historical vulnerability density, it’s likely that using Rust has already prevented hundreds of vulnerabilities from reaching production.
I think a better context is "There are approximately 1.5 million total lines of Rust code in AOSP across new functionality and components", but I wanted to keep the quote focused.
Meanwhile, I just had to try really hard not to leave angry comments under a StrangeLoop video, in which the presenter claimed there is no evidence that statically-typed languages prevent any real bugs from happening.
In the depths of a computer's core,
Where bits and bytes are stored,
Lies a tool that's often ignored
But without it, things would be floored.
It's the rust borrow checker,
A guardian of memory,
Ensuring that data is in the right place
And never causing miseries.
With each line of code it carefully scans,
Checking for underflows and overflows,
Preventing errors, saving the day,
And keeping the program in a flow.
So let's give a nod to this silent hero,
Whose work may go unnoticed, but is never zero,
It's the rust borrow checker,
A vital part of the machine,
Ensuring our programs run clean.
... you can lead a horse to git but you cannot make it commit.
u/kibwen on reddit
If you built a rocket and that rocket crashes, you wouldn't update the spec of the rocket to say "it is expected to crash after reaching 3000m altitude". But if you made a typo that says the rocket should crash after reaching 3000m altitude and somehow passed review, you wouldn't add a self detonation device into the rocket just because of this either.