-
There's a fairly popular thread right now exploring an old issue on whether Rust is thread-safe by its own definition. Some of the comments in that thread inspired me to write a separate thread that should clarify some important topics without the original heated context.
-
SaaSHub
SaaSHub - Software Alternatives and Reviews. SaaSHub helps you find the best software and product alternatives
-
prev.rust-lang.org
Discontinued The previous Rust website. The current website's code is at https://github.com/rust-lang/www.rust-lang.org.
This establishes two key facts: Rust does explicitly advertise thread safety, and in the context of Rust, it is defined as absence of data races. The precise wording has been reconsidered multiple times and still been considered the most appropriate in context.
-
The branch of this debate that I think deserves to live on is whether some kind of function annotation for the total absence of side effects (pure, etc) would be useful to help code maintainers reason about what code may have to worry about side effects and race conditions, just like how unsafe helps maintainers reason about what code may have to worry about memory safety.
