1. How common/custom Drop implementations are in real‑world Rust code
- “Not really. I've worked with rust for 4 years, systems side, and never had to write a custom drop implementation.” — jvanderbot
- “I've written dozens of custom Drop implementations.” — bryanlarsen
- “That's easily the exception rather than the rule. I've seen custom Drop implementations in almost every non‑trivial Rust codebase I worked on.” — neysofu
- “A custom Drop appears very quickly with FFI code.” — gspr
2. Concerns about Rust’s soundness and safety guarantees
- “Now we are at the phase where, Rust is “safe” but only if you use it “correctly” … This is the problem when a language advertises with “guarantees” and it turns out it never had any.” — rvz
- “so what I take from this is that the rust compiler does not guarantee the stuff it claims to.” — vrighter
- “When people describe Rust as 'a memory‑safe programming language' they are describing an aspirational vision, and not a programming language that has actually been designed with sufficient rigor to guarantee memory safety.” — csande17
- “Not to talk about Go, which has intentional unchecked‑at‑runtime UB … yet many argue to consider it memory safe.” — afdbcreid
3. Why the bug remained undiscovered for so long (rarity / normal‑code expectations)
- “What the hell. This is not the esoteric, crazy, impractical constellation … The minimal example is so simple and is definitely something you'd easily come across in normal code.” — vincent-uden
- “I wonder if the reason it works is because you'd easily come across it in normal code, and someone didn't realize that saving the effort of implementing a check for this would result in unsoundness.” — LoganDark
- “The fact that nobody reported this before means it's not, by definition.” — fg137
- “I don't understand how something like this could take so long to be discovered. Pretty crazy stuff.” — Hugsbox
4. Discussion of formal verification, proven compilers, and ongoing verification efforts
- “If you want a verified compiler, you pretty much have to choose between using a subset of standardml or a subset of C and the one proven compiler for each.” — vrighter
- “The eventual goal is verification of the full system … all soundness bugs will be either found and fixed or we'll know how to fix them once they're found.” — afdbcreid
- “There is a formally proven compiler for a large subset of C, so I don't see why formalizing (a large subset of) rust and making a formally proven compiler shouldn't be possible.” — wongarsu
- “I don't think the definition of 'memory safe' has ever required full end‑to‑end stack conformance with a proof. Very few languages have achieved that, though some have.” — insanitybit