Currently, we have a pretty good understanding of what the intended behavior of *safe* Rust is.
That is, there is general agreement (modulo some [bugs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/27868)) about the order in which operations are to be performed, and about what each individual operation does.
Currently, we have a pretty good understanding of what the intended behavior of *safe* Rust is.
That is, there is general agreement (modulo some [bugs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/27868)) about the order in which operations are to be performed, and about what each individual operation does.
Now, it turns out that it is often really hard to obtain precise aliasing information.
This could be the end of the game: No alias information, no way to verify our assumptions, no optimizations.
Now, it turns out that it is often really hard to obtain precise aliasing information.
This could be the end of the game: No alias information, no way to verify our assumptions, no optimizations.
However, it turns out that compiler writers consider these optimizations important enough that they came up with an alternative solution:
Instead of having the compiler verify such assumptions, they declared the programmer responsible.
However, it turns out that compiler writers consider these optimizations important enough that they came up with an alternative solution:
Instead of having the compiler verify such assumptions, they declared the programmer responsible.