Python is memory safe? Can’t you access/address memory with C bindings?

  • Traister101@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Yes Rust is harder to write than C, that’s basically by design as it’s due to the statically guaranteed memory safety. That’s pretty magical. C doesn’t have that and neither does C++ even with smart pointers and such. Rusts unsafe keyword is poorly named, what it actually does is tell the compiler that you the programmer guarantee Rusts rules are upheld within the unsafe block.

    For example

    Access or modify a mutable static variable

    That is a global, that’s incredibly hard to impossible to statically prove it’s safely done, so you have to do it in an unsafe block. So you violating Rusts rules within an unsafe block is actually using the unsafe block wrong. That’s not what it’s for

    • Fal@yiffit.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Yes Rust is harder to write than C

      I would totally argue with this. Rust is way easier to write than C

      • Traister101@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        I’d probably say it depends but I’m no Rust expert and I have no direct experience with C (though quite familiar with C++).

        Basically I’d expect writing C to be easy, but not safe. IE you can quickly and easily write C that compiles but has runtime issues. Rust for the most part will catch everything but logic issues during/before compilation meaning once the program runs you’ll have very high confidence in it’s runtime behavior leading to time spent “fighting the compiler” instead of figuring out wtf is going wrong at runtime.

        • Fal@yiffit.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          IE you can quickly and easily write C that compiles but has runtime issues.

          So what’s “easy” about it then? Just getting something to compile? That’s not a very good measure of “easyness”.

      • vext01@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        I agree for the most part, but writing data structures with shared mutable state can be a total pain in Rust.

        • Fal@yiffit.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          How so? That’s like, the thing that makes rust awesome to write.

          • vext01@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 months ago

            It’s hard to get those kinds of data structures through the borrow checker.

            Try writing a doubly linked list.

            • Fal@yiffit.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              It’s because it’s hard to make them correct. It’s not any harder to write it in rust than in C. Just C lets you do it wrong