this post was submitted on 28 Mar 2024
246 points (94.2% liked)

Rust

5981 readers
45 users here now

Welcome to the Rust community! This is a place to discuss about the Rust programming language.

Wormhole

!performance@programming.dev

Credits

  • The icon is a modified version of the official rust logo (changing the colors to a gradient and black background)

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Slide with text: “Rust teams at Google are as productive as ones using Go, and more than twice as productive as teams using C++.”

In small print it says the data is collected over 2022 and 2023.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 5 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I agree Rust makes it virtually impossible to leak memory by accident. The difference I wanted to point out is that leaking memory is explicitly not considered unsafe, and types like Box have a safe "leak" method. Most "naughty" things you can do in Rust require using the "unsafe" keyword, but leaking memory does not.

[–] tatterdemalion@programming.dev 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Cyclic reference-counted pointers are the most probable way to accidentally leak memory. But it's a pretty well known anti-pattern that is not hard to avoid.

[–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 3 points 7 months ago

Yeah, I didn't think of that case, because any time I use ref counting, cyclic references are at the from of my mind.