Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.iecc.com!.POSTED.news.iecc.com!nerds-end From: Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> Newsgroups: comp.compilers Subject: Re: Paper: PR2: Peephole Raw Pointer Rewriting with LLMs for Translating C to Safer Rust Date: Wed, 14 May 2025 20:01:47 -0000 Organization: Compilers Central Sender: johnl%iecc.com Approved: comp.compilers@iecc.com Message-ID: <25-05-007@comp.compilers> References: <25-05-004@comp.compilers> <25-05-005@comp.compilers> <25-05-006@comp.compilers> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Injection-Info: gal.iecc.com; posting-host="news.iecc.com:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:676f:7373:6970"; logging-data="32612"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@iecc.com" Keywords: Rust, optimize Posted-Date: 14 May 2025 16:42:18 EDT X-submission-address: compilers@iecc.com X-moderator-address: compilers-request@iecc.com X-FAQ-and-archives: http://compilers.iecc.com Xref: csiph.com comp.compilers:3650 On 2025-05-14, arnold@freefriends.org wrote: > In article <25-05-005@comp.compilers>, > Derek wrote: >>I suspect that the same is happening with Rust. If so, how does using >>Rust make the code safer than using C without any checking switched >>on? > > Rust catches many problems at compile time. I am not at all a Rust > expert, or even a novice, but I don't think Rust does runtime > bounds checking, since it relies on compiler analysis instead. How would it be safe if you could write a Rust program that asks the user to input a random decimal number, and then uses it an index to access an array, without any check? The compiler will eliminate bounds checks at compile time if it can infer they are unnecessary; e.g. a loop sets up a dummy variable to step over the correct range, and does not mess with it otherwise. -- TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca