What the hell. This is not the esoteric, crazy, impractical constellation I expected to find with a title like this. The minimal example is so simple and is definitely something you'd easily come across in normal code.

Rust is not a memory-safe language. cve-rs proved it years ago but Rust proponents argue that cve-rs is too contrived to matter.

I don't understand how something like this could take so long to be discovered. Pretty crazy stuff.

Worked on a variance-related lint once and the scary part is how rarely anyone writes down variance by hand, so bugs there just sit untested for a decade.

The heart of the matter:

struct Q<T: 'static>(Option<T>);

impl<T: 'static> Drop for Q<T> { fn drop(&mut self) { // Code in here has access to a non-'static &String // but assumes that it's a &'static String } }

fn main() { let l = String::new(); let mut q = Q(None); q.0 = Some(&l); }

I wonder if the certified compiler for safety critical uses has the same issue.