[Development] As Qt contemplates its future..

[Olivier Goffart]

On Samstag, 15. April 2017 00:23:01 CEST Shawn Rutledge wrote:
[...]
> The Rust guys make the point that it’s necessary to rewrite lots of old
> stuff in Rust in order to have all the security that it can guarantee.

No, that's a common myth.
I've heard people say: "There is no point in making/using rust bindings for Qt 
since that would 'void' the point of Rust because Qt itself is not written in 
a memory safe language."
But that's wrong.

When you are writing code in rust, your code will be safer. Sure, it might 
call into a library that is written in an unsafe language, or that is using 
the unsafe keyword, but that is not your code, and it is the responsibility of 
the library author to fix these bugs.  You can rely on the libraries, kernel, 
compiler, etc. to be safe because other people have already spent countless 
hours fixing bugs and reviewing code.
There is still value in writing in Rust because it will be easier for you to 
make YOUR code safer. 

-- 
Olivier

Woboq - Qt services and support - https://woboq.com - https://code.woboq.org