miniblog.

← Back to all posts
Jun 20, 2015 at 12:43
The only disadvantage is that you're forced to write quite a lot of unsafe code when you use LLVM via FFI. The rest is safe though. (2/2)

Related Posts

Jan 31, 2024 at 06:42
@skybert@emacs.ch Difftastic has very little unsafe, just the FFI to tree-sitter libraries. That said, I've actually seen safe Rust segfault in the past!
Segfault in safe Rust when compiling with optimisations · Issue #30081 · rust-lang/rust
Segfault in safe Rust when compiling with optimisations · Issue #30081 · rust-lang/rust
#![feature(box_syntax, box_patterns)] use std::num::Wrapping; #[derive(Debug, Clone)] pub enum Instruction { Increment { amount: Wrapping<i8>, }, Loop(Vec<Box<Instruction>>), } /// Defines a method...
Dec 12, 2023 at 00:55
What software designs require clean slate 'revolution' implementations, rather than evolution? I can think of: borrow checking in a PL (existing code is unsafe), microkernels (architecture is too different from monokernels), and full REPLs (can't add type redefinition later).
Jan 15, 2023 at 10:22
Is Forth really a memory-unsafe language? I'm struggling to picture what e.g. a use-after-free would look like in such a minimal programming language.