• Tony Bark@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Plans move to Rust, with help from AI

    As if AI could handle the mountains of checks Rust has you account for.

    • tal@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      10 hours ago

      While I agree that I don’t think that an LLM is going to do the heavy lifting of making full use of Rust’s type system, I assume that Rust has some way of overriding type-induced checks. If your goal is just to get to a mechanically-equivalent-to-C++ Rust version, rather than making full use of its type system to try to make the code as correct as possible, you could maybe do that. It could provide the benefit of a starting place to start using the type system to do additional checks.

      • Miaou@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        4 hours ago

        If they rely on UB at all, then this won’t work. At best you get a compile time error, but more likely your rust program will do weird stuff with memory. And given how much people rely on compilers “acting nice” when it comes to aliasing (something rust does not fuck around with), I wouldn’t hold my breathe

      • MartianSands@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        5 hours ago

        The safety designed into Rust is suddenly foreign to the C family that I’m honestly not sure you can do that. Even “unsafe” Rust doesn’t completely switch off the enforced safety

        • InnerScientist@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          48 minutes ago

          Yeah, to quote the manual:

          "[Unsafe Rust allows you to]

          • Dereference a raw pointer.
          • Call an unsafe function or method.
          • Access or modify a mutable static variable.
          • Implement an unsafe trait.
          • Access fields of unions.

          […] The unsafe keyword only gives you access to these five features that are then not checked by the compiler for memory safety."

          https://doc.rust-lang.org/book/ch20-01-unsafe-rust.html