208 private links
A future cargo for python?
A blog post on it: https://astral.sh/blog/uv
There are comments reported from different people
Mann kann erst skalieren, dann optimieren, wenn es ein Drittels des Tages dauert. Der erste Prozess, um PDFs zu erzeugen, ist total innefizient. Es zeigt auch, dass Optimierungen der letzte Schritt des Produkts ist. Sie haben damit lange gelebt. Die Architektur ist eine gute Beispiel für horizontale Skalierung.
Most of the security vulnerabilities come from IEF: Insecure Exposed Functions. They are functions available to the outside that should not, such as a public dropDatabase() for example.
Next comes Routing Abuse tied for second with memory corruption issues. Rust has strongly type strings, so these errors occur less in Rust. The example of HTTP headers is great: Rust does not parse the header name as strings. They are present or not instead.
The average developer is more concerned with shipping the product now and worry about fixing bugs later than how security can be designed from the start.
I also got the same result after the first attempt
Rewrite JS projects in Rust with WebAssembly
Make a UI for it
Signal has open-sourced a SQLite extension that provides better support for non-latin languages (Chinese, Japanese, etc) in the Full-Text Search (FTS) virtual table.
An argumentation for rust
An experience with Axum.
A list of libraries meant to build web apps or the environment around (logging, etc...)
Two good rules of thumbs. I often use them in JS and Vue hints about avoiding v-if in v-for directives.
Recommended rust crates and resources can be found at the end of the guide
TL;DR security vulnerabilities introduced by new Rust contributors are largely less than C++ contributors. They use the amount of commits to measure it as experience. It confirms the claim of the
Namely, while it may still be true that Rust may feel like a more difficult language to learn, in at least some ways, new contributors benefit from its adoption, with their first contributions being less than 2% as likely to introduce vulnerabilities as C++, and first-time contributors appearing at a notably higher rate in the projects examined.
The results should not be used as is, as there are some effects:
- does Rust increase the number of contributors or does Rust act as its own filter and
reduce the rate of new contributors entirely - it is possible Rust developers are more experienced with programming in general. Note that the study focused on new contributors, not new maintainers.
- at around 18,000 commits, a C++ developer will be less likely to introduce a vulnerability than an equivalently experienced Rust developer.
- Finally, there is some limitation to these results in that they
all come from Oxidation projects.