On 28/03/14 08:25 AM, Tommi wrote: > On 28 Mar 2014, at 05:56, Patrick Walton <pcwal...@mozilla.com> wrote: >> >> I think that Rust should give you the ability to opt out of safety, but on a >> per-operation basis. Having it as a compiler option is too much of a >> sledgehammer: often you want some non-performance-critical bounds to be >> checked in the name of safety, while you want some bounds checks to be >> turned off. > > One other argument I can give for a "sledgehammer" feature like this is that > it can be used as a marketing tool against people who are worried about > performance. You can say to those people: "Look, if, at the end of the day, > you decide that you'd rather take raw speed over safety, then there's this > compiler flag you can use to disable all runtime memory safety checking in > your code and get performance on par with C++".
It's called `unsafe`. There's a whole keyword reserved for it.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list Rust-dev@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
