What is your point? Logic bugs can occur in any language. If you decrease amount of other bugs that can happen (like memory safety bugs) then you can focus more on "logic" bugs.
And it fits the category of "rewrite it in rust for the sake of rewriting it in rust. Is it at least as good as the original ? No, but at least it's in rust".
It reminds me of the recent article on hn talking about rewriting sqlite in rust. Simply put, the point is that even if sqlite is written in C and may have small memory leaks, it works perfectly, being tested and fixed over 20+ years. By rewriting it in rust, OK you'll be memory safe, but you will have logic corner edge cases nasty bugs that will appear, and no one wants that. So sqlite will stay in C.
Is it completed? Can it run all tests?
judging by the improvements section at the bottom, no.
But it's written in rust! Look how memory safe a program with a couple of seconds total runtime is! (don't mind the logic bugs)
What is your point? Logic bugs can occur in any language. If you decrease amount of other bugs that can happen (like memory safety bugs) then you can focus more on "logic" bugs.
the point is that rust is the wrong tool for the job, imo. Compilers are notorious for not managing memory
And it fits the category of "rewrite it in rust for the sake of rewriting it in rust. Is it at least as good as the original ? No, but at least it's in rust". It reminds me of the recent article on hn talking about rewriting sqlite in rust. Simply put, the point is that even if sqlite is written in C and may have small memory leaks, it works perfectly, being tested and fixed over 20+ years. By rewriting it in rust, OK you'll be memory safe, but you will have logic corner edge cases nasty bugs that will appear, and no one wants that. So sqlite will stay in C.