|
|
|
|
|
|
by elwes5
2213 days ago
|
|
|
I would argue that Rust removes a class of bugs. Not because the language is better, but because the compiler just does not allow it. It will not let you build your executable if that type of bug exists. For example you could still do something like a SQL injection attack using something compiled with Rust. The C compilers should be doing the same as Rust (some are, but usually at the warn level). Static analysis is not a new thing. Usually the best thing any C/C++ developer can do is crank the warn levels as high as they can go. Then set the project to error out on warn. A good code smell for a project is when you see one that has turned off warnings. Usually the reason is 'too noisy'. I always tell my junior devs the same thing 'the compiler is trying to tell you something all you have to do is listen'. |
|
|