digitalmars.D - [OT] Stack safety in Rust
- David Nadlinger (7/7) Oct 21 2013 Since I know several people here have been following the
- bearophile (11/14) Nov 05 2013 (Sorry for the late answer).
- qznc (5/13) Nov 05 2013 They removed segmented stacks completely now.
- Andrei Alexandrescu (4/18) Nov 05 2013 Well now at least we'll get bearophile off of our backs touting
- Russel Winder (11/13) Nov 06 2013 I guess we could gs/Rust/Go/g. Go uses segmented stacks and is proud of
- Andrei Alexandrescu (4/10) Nov 06 2013 Go is also abandoning segmented stacks: http://goo.gl/fkCvXd
- Walter Bright (2/3) Nov 06 2013 I'm right twice a day!
- =?UTF-8?B?U2ltZW4gS2rDpnLDpXM=?= (4/7) Nov 06 2013 If you ignore the B, you're right all the time!
- Namespace (2/9) Nov 06 2013 Took me a moment to understand that. ^^
- Russel Winder (12/14) Nov 07 2013 My understanding is that that is a proposal under discussion, but I may
- bearophile (4/8) Nov 05 2013 Bye,
- Andrej Mitrovic (5/6) Nov 05 2013 Yes I miss this too. Issue 6088 which you've filed:
Since I know several people here have been following the development of Rust concerning object lifetime and memory safety vs. (segmented) stacks, I figured this might be interesting: http://cmr.github.io/blog/2013/10/21/on-stack-safety/ It's a new blog post by Corey Richardson, discussing how to mitigate memory corruption due to stack overflows. David
Oct 21 2013
David Nadlinger:http://cmr.github.io/blog/2013/10/21/on-stack-safety/ It's a new blog post by Corey Richardson, discussing how to mitigate memory corruption due to stack overflows.(Sorry for the late answer). Very nice article, it presents a interesting hybrid strategy. It seems Rust designers have understood some of the disadvantages of the segmented stacks Walter wrote about. D used to print a "stack overflow", and it was a nice thing. Is D using a a single guard page after the stack of a thread? If this is true can't D intercept the page fault and print the that error message again? Bye, bearophile
Nov 05 2013
On Tuesday, 5 November 2013 at 15:25:21 UTC, bearophile wrote:David Nadlinger:They removed segmented stacks completely now. "The new runtime does not implement segmented stacks and it never will." https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/rust-dev/2013-November/006314.htmlhttp://cmr.github.io/blog/2013/10/21/on-stack-safety/ It's a new blog post by Corey Richardson, discussing how to mitigate memory corruption due to stack overflows.Very nice article, it presents a interesting hybrid strategy. It seems Rust designers have understood some of the disadvantages of the segmented stacks Walter wrote about.
Nov 05 2013
On 11/5/13 7:50 AM, qznc wrote:On Tuesday, 5 November 2013 at 15:25:21 UTC, bearophile wrote:Well now at least we'll get bearophile off of our backs touting segmented stacks, using Rust as the sole argument they're good :o). AndreiDavid Nadlinger:They removed segmented stacks completely now. "The new runtime does not implement segmented stacks and it never will." https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/rust-dev/2013-November/006314.htmlhttp://cmr.github.io/blog/2013/10/21/on-stack-safety/ It's a new blog post by Corey Richardson, discussing how to mitigate memory corruption due to stack overflows.Very nice article, it presents a interesting hybrid strategy. It seems Rust designers have understood some of the disadvantages of the segmented stacks Walter wrote about.
Nov 05 2013
On Tue, 2013-11-05 at 08:12 -0800, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: […]Well now at least we'll get bearophile off of our backs touting segmented stacks, using Rust as the sole argument they're good :o).I guess we could gs/Rust/Go/g. Go uses segmented stacks and is proud of it. For Go it is likely a good architecture, D and Rust have different features and needs. -- Russel. ============================================================================= Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.net 41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: russel winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder
Nov 06 2013
On 11/6/13 4:47 AM, Russel Winder wrote:On Tue, 2013-11-05 at 08:12 -0800, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: […]Go is also abandoning segmented stacks: http://goo.gl/fkCvXd Walter deserves all credit for calling this one. AndreiWell now at least we'll get bearophile off of our backs touting segmented stacks, using Rust as the sole argument they're good :o).I guess we could gs/Rust/Go/g. Go uses segmented stacks and is proud of it.
Nov 06 2013
On 11/6/2013 10:33 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:Walter deserves all credit for calling this one.I'm right twice a day!
Nov 06 2013
On 06.11.2013 23:06, Walter Bright wrote:On 11/6/2013 10:33 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:If you ignore the B, you're right all the time! -- SimenWalter deserves all credit for calling this one.I'm right twice a day!
Nov 06 2013
"Namespace" <rswhite4 googlemail.com> On Wednesday, 6 November 2013 at 22:40:21 UTC, Simen Kjærås wrote:On 06.11.2013 23:06, Walter Bright wrote:Took me a moment to understand that. ^^On 11/6/2013 10:33 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:If you ignore the B, you're right all the time!Walter deserves all credit for calling this one.I'm right twice a day!
Nov 06 2013
On Wed, 2013-11-06 at 10:33 -0800, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: […]Go is also abandoning segmented stacks: http://goo.gl/fkCvXdMy understanding is that that is a proposal under discussion, but I may just have missed the change.Walter deserves all credit for calling this one.And the Rust and Go folk for doing the experiment, even though it seems likely to have failed. -- Russel. ============================================================================= Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.net 41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: russel winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder
Nov 07 2013
qznc:They removed segmented stacks completely now.And it seems the annotation system too was not appreciated:Avoiding this overhead would require an elaborate and burden on the FFI interface.Bye, bearophile
Nov 05 2013
On 11/5/13, bearophile <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> wrote:D used to print a "stack overflow", and it was a nice thing.Yes I miss this too. Issue 6088 which you've filed: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6088 Now whenever I see a really large negative number returned from the app I just assume it was a stack overflow.
Nov 05 2013