On 03/03/14 08:19 PM, Steve Klabnik wrote: > Part of the issue with that statement is that you may or may not > program in this way. Yes, people choose certain subsets of C++ that > are more or less safe, but the language can't help you with that.
You can choose to write unsafe code in Rust too. The safe subset of Rust is exactly that: a subset. A function leaking memory does not qualify as unsafe in Rust anyway, so destructors and smart pointers aren't a very compelling example of safety improvements. Checked move semantics and lifetimes are where the safety comes from.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list Rust-dev@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
