[nec4b]

>>Of course if one writes unsafe Rust and it leads to a CVE then that's on them. >>Who's denying that?

>>The recent bug in the Linux kernel Rust code, based on my understanding, was >>in unsafe code, and related to interop with C. So I wouldn't really classify >>it as a Rust bug.

Sometimes it's good to read the whole thread.

[pdimitar]

I did and it does not quite compute. That was glue code, related to interoperating with C. Not a "normal" everyday Rust code. It's an outlier.

Helps to read and ingest context.

Though I do agree that in the strictest of technical senses it's indeed a "Rust" bug, as in: bug in code written in Rust.

[nec4b]

Why is glue code not normal code in Rust? I don't think anyone else would say that for any other language out there. Does it physically pain you to admit it's a bug in Rust code? I write bugs in all kind of languages and never feel the need for adjectives like "technical", "normal", "everyday" or words like "outlier" to make me feel not let down by the language of choice.

[pclmulqdq]

The bug in question is in rust glue code that interfaces with a C library. It's not in the rust-C interface or on the C side. If you write python glue code that interfaces with numpy and there's a bug in your glue, it's a python bug not a numpy bug.