None of these "issues" are systems issues, they're memory safety issues. If you think systems programming is about memory saftey, then you're demonstrating the problem.
Eg., some drivers cannot be memory safe, because memory is arranged outside of the driver to be picked up "at the right time, in the right place" and so on.
Statically-provable memory saftey is, ironically, quite a bad property to have for a systems programming language, as it prevents actually controlling the devices of the machine. This is, of course, why rust has "unsafe" and why anything actually systems-level is going to have a fair amount of it.
The operation of machine devices isnt memory safe -- memory saftey is a static property of a program's source code, that prevents describing the full behaviour of devices correctly.
Yes, touching hardware directly often requires memory unsafety. Rust allows that, but encourages you to come up with an abstraction that can be used safely and thereby minimize the amount of surface area which has to do unsafe things. You still have to manually assert / verify the correctness of that wrapper, obviously.
> This is, of course, why rust has "unsafe" and why anything actually systems-level is going to have a fair amount of it.
There are entire kernels written in Rust with less than 10% unsafe code. The standard library is less than 3% unsafe, last I checked. People overestimate how much "unsafe" is actually required and therefore they underestimate how much value Rust provides. Minimizing the amount of code doing unsafe things is good practice no matter what programming language you use, Rust just pushes hard in that direction.
Eg., some drivers cannot be memory safe, because memory is arranged outside of the driver to be picked up "at the right time, in the right place" and so on.
Statically-provable memory saftey is, ironically, quite a bad property to have for a systems programming language, as it prevents actually controlling the devices of the machine. This is, of course, why rust has "unsafe" and why anything actually systems-level is going to have a fair amount of it.
The operation of machine devices isnt memory safe -- memory saftey is a static property of a program's source code, that prevents describing the full behaviour of devices correctly.