Reminder: unless your entire compiler toolchain is formally verified (it's not), you have no guarantees that the code it emits is memory-safe. Language builtin collections in memory-safe languages are no different from rust's unsafe-using stdlib collections.
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @Gankra_ @ManishEarth
Don't most memory safe languages implement most of their collection libraries in the language itself, thus avoiding this problem?
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @samth @ManishEarth
Well, let’s consider hash tables/dictionaries: Java, C#, Lisp, Scheme, OCaml self-host them. JS, Python, Ruby, Go, Lua, and PHP don’t self-host them. (In Go’s case this compromises memory safety.)
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
What is meant by "self hosting" here? i.e. Go's maps are implemented in Go itself. That seems self hosting. It is the case though they are not concurrently safe across goroutines.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Yeah, you’re right, they’re implemented in Go now, though it’s unsafe Go.
2:02 PM - 11 Jul 2019
0 replies
0 retweets
0 likes
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.