Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by aw1621107 171 days ago
> What about this one ? "Futurelock in Tokyo" ?

Deadlocks are not memory safety issues by the definition used in the OP. Furthermore, safe Rust is only intended to guarantee protection against data races, not race conditions in general.
1 comments
lenkite 171 days ago
What about these ones ? They are considered memory-safety/soundness issues

'static closures/FnDefs/futures with non-'static return type are unsound https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/84366

Resolve unsound interaction between noalias and self-referential data (incl. generators, async fn) https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/63818

link
aw1621107 171 days ago
I think this is starting to wander rather far afield from where this thread started...

But anyways, at least from a quick glance those would at the very least seem to run into codys' unintentional bug vs. intentional behavior distinction. The bugs you linked are... well... bugs that the Rust devs fully intend to fix regardless of whether any in-the-wild exploits ever arise. The Go data race issue, on the other hand, is an intentional implementation decision and the devs have not indicated any interest in fixing it so far.

link
tptacek 171 days ago
Neither set of issues is apposite to MemorySafety.org. The whole thing is just a dumb language war spat.
link