top | item 33658141 (no title) Others | 3 years ago I don’t follow. It’s exactly like C in this regard, except with Box::new instead of malloc. discuss order hn newest conradev|3 years ago The key difference as outlined in the article is that Box::new cannot fail in Rust, but the underlying malloc can.In userspace it is rare enough that a Rust panic is considered acceptable behavior, but this is not the case for the kernel.But, it is controllable for sure tialaramex|3 years ago Unsurprisingly the kernel's Box does not have Box::new it provides instead Box::try_new which is fallible.
conradev|3 years ago The key difference as outlined in the article is that Box::new cannot fail in Rust, but the underlying malloc can.In userspace it is rare enough that a Rust panic is considered acceptable behavior, but this is not the case for the kernel.But, it is controllable for sure tialaramex|3 years ago Unsurprisingly the kernel's Box does not have Box::new it provides instead Box::try_new which is fallible.
tialaramex|3 years ago Unsurprisingly the kernel's Box does not have Box::new it provides instead Box::try_new which is fallible.
conradev|3 years ago
In userspace it is rare enough that a Rust panic is considered acceptable behavior, but this is not the case for the kernel.
But, it is controllable for sure
tialaramex|3 years ago