NO, it's not like Go. Rust's unsafe is explicit, unlike Go. It allows low-level control with clear risk flags, ensuring memory safety unless you opt out. A whole variety of checks & fuzzers can be run on the unsafe code, and it can be sealed away into isolated parts/modules, exposing only safe interfaces.
On Sunday, June 22nd, 2025 at 07:33, Jon Perryman <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, 22 Jun 2025 01:36:55 +0000, kekronbekron [email protected] > wrote: > > > Times like this are when the prominent voices and vendors need to > > dial up the volume in requesting Rust, where memory errors "simply go away". > > > I think that Rust is like GO which has an unsafe class. They understand there > are times you need that functionality but at least they warn you about a > potential risk. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
