robinm

joined 1 year ago
[–] robinm@programming.dev 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)
void foo() {
    std::vector v = {0, 1, 2, 4};
    const auto& ref = v[1];
    add_missing_values(v);
    std::cout << ref << "\n";
}

void add_missing_values(std::vector<int>& v) {
    // ...
    v.push_back(3);
}

Neither foo(), nor add_missing_values() looks suspicious. Nonetheless, if v.push_back(3) requires v to grow, then ref becomes an invalid reference and std::cout << ref becomes UB (use after free). In Rust this would not compiles.

It is order of magnitudes easier to have lifetime errors in C++ than in Rust (use after free, double free, data races, use before initialisation, …)

[–] robinm@programming.dev 1 points 4 days ago (3 children)

Is it possible to do in Rust?

Yes

Is possible to do in Rust, by mistake, and not easily caught by a review?

Definitively not.

[–] robinm@programming.dev 1 points 2 weeks ago

DRY and YAGNI are awesome iif you also practice YNIRN (You Need It Right Now)! Otherwise you just get boilerplate of spaghetti

[–] robinm@programming.dev 27 points 1 month ago

You got me in the first 3 quarters, not gonna lie!

[–] robinm@programming.dev 1 points 1 month ago

There are cases where instead of origin/master..HEAD you may want to use @{upstream}..HEAD instead to compare with the upstream of your current branch. It's unfortunately quite unknown.

[–] robinm@programming.dev 6 points 3 months ago (1 children)

This post from 2022 was very interesting:

There are approximately 1.5 million total lines of Rust code in AOSP across new functionality and components [...] These are low-level components that require a systems language which otherwise would have been implemented in C++.

To date, there have been zero memory safety vulnerabilities discovered in Android’s Rust code.

https://security.googleblog.com/2022/12/memory-safe-languages-in-android-13.html

[–] robinm@programming.dev 1 points 3 months ago

The quote (and the associated discussion) is such an important part of Rust and why I love this language so much. Anything that can be automated should at one point be automated reliably, and the sooner the better.

[–] robinm@programming.dev 2 points 6 months ago

I absolutely agree that method extraction can be abused. One should not forget that locality is important. Functionnal idioms do help to minimise the layer of intermediate functions. Lamda/closure helps too by having the function much closer to its use site. And local variables can sometime be a better choice than having a function that return just an expression.

[–] robinm@programming.dev 8 points 6 months ago (3 children)

Good advice, clear, simple and to the point.

Stated otherwise: "whenever you need to add comments to an expression, try to use named intermediate variables, method or free function".

[–] robinm@programming.dev 1 points 6 months ago

A fun read but it really seems that his writting style is hit or miss!

[–] robinm@programming.dev 10 points 6 months ago

I never understood why python won agaist ruby. I find ruby an even better executable pseudo code language than python.

[–] robinm@programming.dev 2 points 6 months ago

Awesome! It reminds me of that clip that uses the windows task manager to run doom on a 896 core CPU.

 

The Rust for Linux (RFL) project may not have (yet) resulted in user-visible changes to the Linux kernel, but it seems the wider world has taken notice. Hongyu Li has announced that the Rust for Linux code is now part of a satellite just launched out of China. The satellite is running a system called RROS, which follows the old RTLinux pattern of running a realtime kernel alongside Linux. The realtime core is written in Rust, using the RFL groundwork.

Despite its imperfections, we still want to share RROS with the community, showcasing our serious commitment to using RFL for substantial projects and contributing to the community's growth. Our development journey with RROS has been greatly enriched by the support and knowledge from the RFL community. We also have received invaluable assistance from enthusiastic forks here, especially when addressing issues related to safety abstraction

(Thanks to Dirk Behme).

view more: next ›