@Gankra @tedmielczarek Those assertions will only be...

@Gankra @tedmielczarek Those assertions will only be tripped if your testing covers those cases, which it probably doesn't, or you would have already found the bugs.

There is also no guarantee that fixing type mismatches won't add bugs as well as remove some. I'd even say it's quite likely, having seen the mayhem caused by people "fixing" compiler warnings in C code without understanding it properly.

Like 26 September at 15:41 | Wall-to-wall | Open on society.oftrolls.com

4 comments

Mans R

@Gankra @tedmielczarek Don't get me wrong, built-in buffer overflow prevention is great, but wholesale code rewrites are much more risky than people seem willing to admit.

26 September at 15:41 | Open on society.oftrolls.com

Gankra

@mansr you don't need to add any new tests/assertions, boring rust code will slap hundreds of new implicit assertions between unwraps(), bounds checks, and overflow checks and the like

26 September at 15:42 | Open on toot.cat

Mans R

@Gankra If the C code passes your testing, then those tests are unlikely to trip any of the new (implicit) checks. That doesn't mean there are no bugs.

26 September at 15:51 | Open on society.oftrolls.com

Ted Mielczarek

@mansr @Gankra you are moving the goal posts here but sure.

26 September at 16:29 | Open on mastodon.social

Go Up