Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

The scope of the unsafe block can be appropriately reduced #38

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

peamaeq
Copy link

@peamaeq peamaeq commented Jun 23, 2022

In these functions you use the unsafe keyword for many safe expressions. However, I found that only 4 functions are real unsafe operations (see the list below).

We need to mark unsafe operations more precisely using unsafe keyword. Keeping unsafe blocks small can bring many benefits. For example, when mistakes happen, we can locate any errors related to memory safety within an unsafe block. This is the balance between Safe and Unsafe Rust. The separation is designed to make using Safe Rust as ergonomic as possible, but requires extra effort and care when writing Unsafe Rust.
Real unsafe operation list:

  1. the dealloc()\read()\free()\as_ref() function(these are unsafe functions)

@jrmuizel
Hope this PR can help you.
Best regards.
References
https://doc.rust-lang.org/nomicon/safe-unsafe-meaning.html
https://doc.rust-lang.org/book/ch19-01-unsafe-rust.html

@jrmuizel
Copy link
Collaborator

I've change the internals some so this will need to be redone.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants