After #Bun unsafe audit slop report...
https://bun.com/bun-unsafe-audit
...I've randomly looked into the CSS parser module and found this:
A function that uses `unsafe` to convert a `SmallList` into a boxed slice. I can't say anything about whether it is a correct usage of `unsafe`.
What I can say, however:
There is already an equivalent method on `SmallList` that uses _zero_ `unsafe`!
In other words: It's duplicated code + #unsafe!
1/3
@janriemer it contains a lot of unsafe blocks, so what? zig implementation was unsafe completely and entirely.
@janriemer I feel like the moment you have to resort to statistical analysis quantifying the amount of unsafe in your codebase is the moment the codebase should be put into maintenance mode.
The fact that they're doing this immediately after a "rewrite" is unsettling.
The fact that they're doing this publicly and proudly in a blogpost with flashy graphics is… I don't know. Words fail me here.
@scvalex Yeah, I know what you mean here.
But one also has to acknowledge their transparency and how they handle it. They are at least aware and want to improve the situation.
When viewing your arguments with the lens of the actual rewrite itself, then yes, I totally agree!
IMHO, this codebase is beyond repair.
#Prediction: it will take at least 12 - 15 months to clean up 95% of unnecessary use of `unsafe`.
2/3
Oh, so it turns out it's not even a 1:1 duplicate of the code, but some alternative (?) transformed version of it:
The code for `into_vec` in `SmallVec` does this:
https://github.com/servo/rust-smallvec/blob/9da26a5315c563d4de181b0be9e75d165289f81e/src/lib.rs#L1481
So the duplicated code can have worse performance than the original safe version, because it doesn't reuse the allocation (if the SmallVec has already spilled onto the heap).
3/3
Install bonfire.cafe
Get the full app experience
