Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:C++ interop is hard (Score 1) 17

The biggest problem are the platform ABIs that are not expressive enough for either rust or C++. That means both sides do tricks to smuggle extra information through the C-compatible platform ABIs -- or to pass constructs entirely around that ABI. E.g. name mangling is used to smuggle function overloading through the C ABI by encoding type information into the symbol name which is just a string.

Things going around the ABI is all the stuff that C++ requires to always be in a header file. Those headers get directly included into the user of a library, going around the ABI layer completely.

The challenge for interoperability is to extract all the necessary information from one language and make that available in the other. Gathering that information without some defined ABI means extracting it from the source code of the language itself. That is damn hard, especially if one side is C++ that needs heuristics to even get parsed.

Meanwhile Rust-inspired safety principles and constructs are being added to C++ right now in the form of Circle C++ and an enhanced libstdc++, and in the near future in the C++ standard. The future for C++ is quite bright and will allow more cost-effective ways of retrofitting safety onto existing C++ code.

There is a proposal to have Rust semantics in C++. Nothing more. It will take decades to get that through the committee, with prominent members already having said that all other venues need to be explored before this proposal can be considered.

Sean having suggested to not have a new C++ standard library (but to use rusts instead) is not going to help find support inside the committee.

Comment Re: Bugs prevented per line of C++ code (Score 4, Insightful) 140

You should write correct code everywhere.

Yeap, but humans just can not do that. We need tools to help us.

C++ isn't Rust. Are you now suggesting that C++ adopt implementation details of Rust to solve a problem?

... and yet that is exactly what the "Safe C++" proposal is that has hit the committee recently.

Comment Re:Good and bad (Score 4, Insightful) 140

"The responsibility is on our ecosystem, not the developer"

This is false. You need to train your developers (unless they're already skilled).

We are pretty much the only industry that thinks like that. There is no contradiction between "improve eco system" and "train developers". All the other industries around us do both.

We are also pretty unique as an industry in that we watch our products fail and then go "there is nothing we can do about that, sucks that random people were too stupid to write proper code". We urgently need to improve, or we need regulators to step in to make us improve. Code is just getting too important to continue with our attitude.

Submission + - Samba gets funding from the German Sovereign Tech Fund.

Jeremy Allison - Sam writes: The Samba project has secured significant funding (€688,800.00) from the German
Sovereign Tech Fund (STF) to advance the project. The investment was
successfully applied for by SerNet. Over the next 18 months, Samba developers
from SerNet will tackle 17 key development subprojects aimed at enhancing
Samba’s security, scalability, and functionality.

The Sovereign Tech Fund is a German federal government funding program that
supports the development, improvement, and maintenance of open digital
infrastructure. Their goal is to sustainably strengthen the open source
ecosystem.

The project's focus is on areas like SMB3 Transparent Failover, SMB3 UNIX
extensions, SMB-Direct, Performance and modern security protocols such as SMB
over QUIC. These improvements are designed to ensure that Samba remains a
robust and secure solution for organizations that rely on a sovereign IT
infrastructure. Development work began as early as September the 1st and is
expected to be completed by the end of February 2026 for all sub-projects.

All development will be done in the open following the existing Samba
development process. First gitlab CI pipelines have already been running [4]
and gitlab MRs will appear soon!

https://samba.plus/blog/detail...

https://www.sovereigntechfund....

Comment Re:Maybe (Score 1) 104

The upstream Linux kernel doesn't differentiate between security bugs and "normal" bug fixes. So the new kernel.org CNA just assigns CVE's to all fixes. They don't score them.

Look at the numbers from the whitepaper:

"In March 2024 there were 270 new CVEs created for the stable Linux kernel. So far in April 2024 there are 342 new CVEs:"

Comment Re:Yeah (Score 1) 104

Yes ! That's exactly the point. Trying to curate and select patches for a "frozen" kernel fails due to the firehose of fixes going in upstream.

And in the kernel many of these could be security bugs. No one is doing evaluation on that, there are simply too many fixes in such a complex code base to check.

Slashdot Top Deals

FORTUNE'S FUN FACTS TO KNOW AND TELL: A giant panda bear is really a member of the racoon family.

Working...