actix-web-postmortem VS safety-dance

> IIRC it was mostly the initial reluctance of the author to merge PRs that rewrote unsafe to safe Rust.

No, not really. Spinning the actix-web as the author's reluctance to accept PRs is a gross misrepresentation of the problem faced by the project.

For context, here's what the author had to say about that regrettable episode.

https://github.com/fafhrd91/actix-web-postmortem

And from the postmortem:

[2]: https://github.com/rust-secure-code/safety-dance

The most "virtuous"/desirable statement in this topic is probably the "100% safe code now - while being faster than the C version!" on the rust-secure-code/safety-dance entry for miniz_oxide.

According to the rust-secure-code/safety-dance trophy case, their audit left miniz_oxide 100% safe and faster than the C version.

Efforts that don't try to pick winners, but just to help packages that already exist, like Rust Safety Dance and developing tools like Miri. (And that dependency-improving sprint, the name of which eludes me, but which was mentioned in TWIR a while ago.)

I'm similarly iffy on using a parser for something as web-exposed as e-mail which uses unsafe for a performance boost without a thumbs-up from someone like /u/Shnatsel and the Safety Dance.

Since this all happened, the safety-dance project has come into existence, which aims to channel the mob into doing useful things, not just piling onto someone who's got different views on what they want from Rust.

https://github.com/rust-secure-code/safety-dance is always looking for contributors.