For me, the biggest problem with this essay lies in this one sentence: "Memory safety could qualify as a targeted problem, though histori...
For me, the biggest problem with this essay lies in this one sentence: "Memory safety could qualify as a targeted problem, though historically that’s been a tough sell on its own." My question is: Who offered memory safety on its own , historically? I think the reason that memory safety has been a tough sell historically is that it always came with performance overhead and lack of low-level control, and people kept using C and C++ for low-level programming as a result. By contrast, Rust tries to go farther than any other industry language in truly providing memory safety on its own —without any of the baggage of JITs, or garbage collection/pervasive reference counting. If you had to sum up the raison d'être for Rust in one sentence, that'd be it. I think that historically, memory safety "on its own" hasn't been tried, at least to the degree that Rust strives for.
Posted by pcwalton on Jan 11, 2015, 12:30 AM
Tags
Related issues
- Not sure what you suggest to do.
- Why is this not yet published on the official website and why is there no CVE?
- The biggest problem with having an LLM do this, from what I've observed of at least frontier models, is that the way they are trained...
- The biggest problem with MOND is that it was hand-crafted with additional parameters simply to fit the data.
- (My comment is about detached houses).
- The biggest problem with this is that I can't run my company's own internal benchmarks against this API, because they will be trained int...
Raise real-world problems, find people facing the same issue, and discuss solutions.9,000 issues0 comments
hackernews (Other)
Not sure what you suggest to do.
NewWhy is this not yet published on the official website and why is there no CVE?
NewThe biggest problem with having an LLM do this, from what I've observed of at least frontier models, is that the way they are trained...
The biggest problem with MOND is that it was hand-crafted with additional parameters simply to fit the data.
(My comment is about detached houses).
The biggest problem with this is that I can't run my company's own internal benchmarks against this API, because they will be trained int...
> steer Claude away from over-engineering parts of the system in response to hypothetical concerns.
Why is there no comparison with FLUX 3 Image?
For me, the biggest problem with this essay lies in this one sentence: "Memory safety could qualify as a targeted problem, though histori...
For me, the biggest problem with this essay lies in this one sentence: "Memory safety could qualify as a targeted problem, though historically that’s been a tough sell on its own." My question is: Who offered memory safety on its own , historically? I think the reason that memory safety has been a tough sell historically is that it always came with performance overhead and lack of low-level control, and people kept using C and C++ for low-level programming as a result. By contrast, Rust tries to go farther than any other industry language in truly providing memory safety on its own —without any of the baggage of JITs, or garbage collection/pervasive reference counting. If you had to sum up the raison d'être for Rust in one sentence, that'd be it. I think that historically, memory safety "on its own" hasn't been tried, at least to the degree that Rust strives for.
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Start the discussion.