64
submitted 1 year ago by jwr1@kbin.earth to c/rust@programming.dev
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] NGram@piefed.ca 7 points 1 year ago

The strict_* set of integer function look interesting though I'm unlikely to use something that panics by design. I'm sure that's useful in programs that panic to indicate problems. Do those exist? I always treat panics as a design failure.

Duration::from_mins() is useful for me since I've been doing Duration::from_secs(minutes * 60) for some things in my projects, which bugged me a bit.

[-] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 3 points 1 year ago

The non-strict versions also panic by default, but only in debug mode. So if you were willing to use abs() you should be willing to use strict_abs().

Arguably a bit of a mistake to have the "obvious" function names be surprisingly unsafe, but I guess it's too late to fix that.

[-] flying_sheep@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

I think this is where safety and performance are actually in conflict.

I think guaranteeing a panic leads to much worse code gen in this case.

[-] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago

Yes that's true, but the point is you should have to opt in to surprising or risky behaviour.

this post was submitted on 30 Oct 2025
64 points (100.0% liked)

Rust

8358 readers
2 users here now

Welcome to the Rust community! This is a place to discuss about the Rust programming language.

Wormhole

!performance@programming.dev

Credits

  • The icon is a modified version of the official rust logo (changing the colors to a gradient and black background)

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS