> On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 10:19 PM, Steve Klabnik <st...@steveklabnik.com> > 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.
On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 6:22 PM, Fernando Pelliccioni <fpellicci...@gmail.com> wrote: > Then, you could show this in the article, using the "good" subset of C++. > Then people can choose. I think Steve's point is that, with Rust, you get a language-level guarantee. With C++, you can avoid the unsafe parts, but to do so you have to be especially vigilant; it's easy to accidentally get into unsafe territory. With Rust, you always know when you're stepping into unsafe territory. At least, that's the goal. Lindsey _______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list Rust-dev@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
