Rudra VS rust-verification-tools

If you’re writing unsafe Rust, you might consider cargo miri and Rudra as additional static analyzers which can find bugs rustc won’t

In my opinion, much of Rust-specific PhD research likely to be publishable and/or high impact either falls into verification (e.g Prusti, Cruesot) or bug-finding (e.g. Rudra, SyRust). Ralf Jung and his collaborators have done exceptional work in the verification space.

Perhaps Rudra as well.

Haven't used it myself, but I remembered a tool called Rudra was recently posted about in the sub

Not sure proves your point, but maybe doesn't disprove your point strongly enough. I am not qualified to argue from experience about how Rust is ideally suited in the ways you think it is not. But from everything I have seen, it can do a whole lot of what C++ is also good at. Rust safety is not all or nothing and a codebase could definitely prioritize ergonomics over correctness.

Two things that I saw in the last couple weeks that might start to sway you.

https://github.com/sslab-gatech/Rudra#readme

GhostCell: Separating Permissions from Data in Rust

I hope someone also picks up the work started in https://project-oak.github.io/rust-verification-tools/ - the idea of having a `cargo verify` tool that supports different backends is great for bridging the academic PoCs with something that an average programmer can integrate into the dev workflow.