|
|
|
|
|
by zamalek
17 days ago
|
|
That is an absolutely massive amount of unsafe, is the plan to reduce it over time? The benefits of the Rust build system are reason alone to use this (as a direct competitor to the C version), but claims about memory safety are suspect no matter how confident the authors are about correctness. |
|
Typically the suggested way to use it is to obtain "bad" rust directly from it (but which still works etc), and then make that "bad" rust more idiomatic. I don't remember any publicly visible success stories for this though. The current Bun rewrite is arguably of this form, but not exactly a "success story" in producing idiomatic, safe rust. Other large rewrites that were well-publicized/docoument, e.g. the fish shell from c++ -> Rust, took a different approach (factor into modules/rewrite each module by hand).
https://fishshell.com/blog/rustport/