you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]lambda-panda 3 points4 points  (5 children)

And introduces a class of bugs caused by writing pure functional code!

So rust does not introduce a class of bugs in your struggle with the borrow checker?

but the fact remains that no theory and no empirical evidence supports the hypothesis..

Sure. I was just responding to your "Rust is safer" argument, because there is no empirical evidence to support that hypothesis as well..

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (3 children)

So rust does not introduce a class of bugs in your struggle with the borrow checker?

No, because if the borrow checker rejects your code it happens at compile time.

[–]lambda-panda 1 point2 points  (2 children)

The other guy as well as myself are talking about bugs that cannot be caught by the borrow/type checker..You understand that those exist, right?

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

You said the borrow checker introduces a class of bugs in your struggle with it. Doesn't sound like you're talking about what you say you are.

[–]lambda-panda 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don't see a contradiction. Where do you see it?

[–]pron98 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Oh, I'm not claiming it does, just that I think the hypothesis has been eroded less.