> - If a compiled safe Rust program has unsound behavior, the compiler needs to be fixed
replyNot really: the program still needs to be fixed, but fixing the compiler ensures that this unsound behavior never happens again to anyone. So you have two bugs to solve (vs C++'s one bug) but then you kill an entire class of unsoundness bugs just by recompiling.
That's not completely correct. If the Rust or C++ compiler has a bug in both cases either the compiler has to be fixed or the program can be adjusted to work around said compiler bug If possible. However, It's fair to argue that the Rust compiler makes more assertions and is more complex, which results in a larger error surface.
replyWhich is better, surely? One fix for every program written in Rust vs everyone having to fix it themselves…
reply> If a compiled safe Rust program has unsound behavior, the compiler needs to be fixed
replyCan you provide an example of such a program that can’t be fixed at the program level like a C++ example?
Sure, usually the program can be changed to avoid the issue, but the key here is that the Rust compiler is wrong and needs to be fixed. Once fixed, the actual program fix also falls in place, as it cannot be compiled anymore.
replyThat's the same kind of issue like a bug in a C++ compiler.
replyThe average cause of unsoundness in a C++ program is not a C++ compiler bug
replyThis is about an issue in the type checker, which would lead to unsoundness also in a C++ program. And also in Rust most causes of runtime failures are actually things that happen in `unsafe` blocks.
reply