TWiR quote of the week

"Rust does best when we're ambitious"

-- Niko Matsakis quoted by Yoshua Wuyts on his blog (thanks @yoshuawuyts for clearing the quote!)


Hah, I've pinged the person in question whether they're comfortable being quoted. I intentionally kept them anonymous so I didn't have to clear the quote in question (it's close to winter holidays, I thought they might be offline already), but welp, so much for that haha.

I'll reach back out if they get back to me with permission to attribute this quote to them.


Cleared the quote, you can attribute it to Niko Matsakis (:

1 Like


Constraints liberate. Rust is for now the most liberating set of constraints we have in a programming language.

Yours truly on twitter


Also self-nominating from this toot:

The Rust community has long had a codified commitment to being a safe space and the language has benefited enormously from it. It's not hard to find people from trans, gay, furry, or otherwise marginalized groups leading initiatives to improve the language or manage critical open source libraries. When we allow bigots in, our community suffers, both in character and in output.

- Brian Kung on


@steffahn on this fine forum:

You haven’t “fooled” rustc, you are using unsafe code. Unsafe code means that all you can do is fool yourself.


In Rust terms, the entire Windows system is unsafe. Do you mean that using Rust for Windows development is fooling yourself? I'm trying to apply Rust to a Windows app. Maybe it is a stillborn idea.

The quote is not "if you use unsafe, you're fooling yourself", rather, it is "if you use unsafe incorrectly, you're fooling yourself". When you use unsafe correctly, it doesn't apply.


BlackBerry Limited (NYSE: BB; TSX: BB) and Elektrobit today announced they are collaborating on integration efforts to support the Rust programming language, empowering developers to build safe, reliable and efficient automotive software.

Thanks to @blonk for the link! Unfortunately, it doesn't contain any catchy quotes. Perhaps there is a more memetic announcement?

1 Like

Turns out, it's easier to test and refactor when objects are not carrying mutable references around or are in complex graphs of relationships.

Once I was no longer fighting the borrow checker and saw him more as an adviser than a hurdle, Rust became bliss.

From My Year With Rust: The Good, The Bad, The Ugly | BreakBuildGames (which was already mentioned in TWiR, but I didn't see as a QotW suggestion).


Unfortunately, the author goes on to give a lot of pretty unfounded criticism of the language in the same post (eg. the "crates are not mature" argument is wielded merely based on 0.x version numbers, pointing out an obvious misunderstanding and/or lack of experience and/or lack of research – this question has been explained to death and has no correlation with perceived or actual maturity). The same goes for citing the supposedly opinionated nature of the language as a bad part, arguing that "only time will tell whether it's right or wrong" – I mean, haven't the last 16 years been enough proof? And the list goes on – "Rust is not OOP" is declared a downside, too (whereas at best this is a subjective choice among equal paradigms, at worst it's not true since OOP proved to be highly problematic during the last few decades), etc. It would have been better for this person to gain more experience in the community and the ecosystem before giving unjustified criticism of matters s/he clearly doesn't fully grasp in the grand scheme of things.


Working with traits has been hard. I find a need to revisit how to use traits quite often, especially when using generic types.

Jim Hodapp in My impressions of Rust after a year of working with it

Common arguments against Rust's safety guarantees:

  • The library you're binding to can have a segfault in it.
  • RAM can physically fail, causing dangling pointers.
  • The computer the Rust program is running on can be hit by a meteorite.
  • Alan Turing can come back from the dead and tell everyone that he actually made up computer science and none of it is real, thus invalidating every program ever made, including all Rust programs.

-- Ironmask @ Google To Allow Rust Code In The Chromium Browser - Phoronix Forums


A cosmic ray can also affect your code's behaviour, but that's not Rust's fault.

but that's not Rust's fault

It's a caricature of the kinds of reaches that keep getting made by people who see the prospect of Modern C++ still being flawed as some kind of threat to their emotional well-being/self-worth/identity/whatever.


Then Rust can do what it's always done - outsource experimentation of higher level features to external crates, and if there's demand - incorporate the winner to the standard library.

this isn't my quote, or from the rust community but I figured you guy's would love this

forget ChatGPT, Rust is here to take my job
-dry-ambition-5456 from r/cpp


Self-nominating because I find myself saying things like this regularly, and I think it's philosophically important for Rust:

The signature is a firewall that keeps mistakes inside the function from affecting callers of the function.


Ironic, isn't it?

There are a bunch of asterisks -- auto trait leakage from RPIT is another one.

It's a principle, not an inviolable law of the universe.