Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

This is like telling green energy advocates that oil isn’t going away. Everyone knows already. When engaging people consider not assuming maximum naïveté



Comparing C++ to fossil fuels and Rust to green energy is the most Rust thing ever.

Green energy as a jihad is understandable, if maybe counter-productive at times. Rust as jihad makes no sense to me. It’s nifty: exposing mainstream programmers to the Maybe monad, and limited type classes, and cheap (not free!) bounds/use-after-free/double-delete checking is cool. Web browsers and HTTP servers and sshd servers and maybe even shells should probably be written in Rust.

But a sense of safety coming from rustc is easy to over-indulge in: lots of really scary attacks are perfectly possible against Rust programs. It kills 90’s-style stack smashes dead, no doubt and in that sense it’s an improvement, but people get pwned lots of interesting ways now, and there will be a headline CVE in a rust program, count on it.


Coincidentally, both green energy advocates and Rust advocates tend to have fairly naïve expectations.

I consider myself a green energy advocate and would be glad to see c++ go away but I find naïveté a huge obstacle on the path to both of those goals.




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: