Is this written in pure safe rust? #7584
Replies: 3 comments 1 reply
-
|
This question may appear as a single sentence, but in fact it requires answers on two entirely different levels. First, JIT/AOT is fully optional. It is not even enabled by default at the moment. So the straightforward answer to the surface-level question is simply that you can turn the feature off. However, the more fundamental question is that we are implementing a programming language. No matter how safely we use Rust, at best we are only proving the safety of the Rust code itself. The kind of safety that the implementation language can guarantee is only a part of the overall picture in a programming language. The real question should be this: when you say you want it to be written in “pure safe Rust,” what kind of safety are you actually expecting to be guaranteed? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I was expecting being written in pure safe rust would mean at the very least the interpreter would be free from memory vunerabilities aside from what it does with ffi. Of course assuming the native code that rust compiler generates is safe. As far as jit and aot, I didnt think about the question enough before posting it. Even considering the obserd goal of porting llvm to pure safe rust, it wouldnt guarantee that the native code that it generates is correct. So my question is basicly...
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
No, and rewriting this very important bit of code (which governs what |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Is this written in pure safe rust?
If not is it planned?
Jit and Aot is a whole diffrent can of worms since you would have to write or find a library that generates native instructions in pur rust which seems impossible.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions