Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Tim Rentsch Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++ Subject: Re: "Microsoft Exploring Rust as the Solution for Safe Software" Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2019 22:12:30 -0800 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 13 Message-ID: <864kyc64vl.fsf@linuxsc.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="dc2463479761dea98da7667c87edc47e"; logging-data="15778"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+mW7ghquTVqqGsULwFlJDGBKC3CiAHxOc=" User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.4 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:OftAGA9v3jMdU+8x4cQOs84tNY4= sha1:7yXxqrkI9OquiNNvWnTioG+eLkE= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c++:70325 Lynn McGuire writes: > "Microsoft Exploring Rust as the Solution for Safe Software" > https://www.infoq.com/news/2019/11/microsoft-exploring-rust-safety/ > > I doubt it. Repeating a similar comment made in another posting, I propose a rule of thumb for postings like this one: unless a posting is likely to generate a substantial fraction of responses that are simultaneously of interest in both comp.lang.c and comp.lang.c++, it should be multi-posted rather than cross-posted (specifically for c.l.c and c.l.c++).