0.1.4 (older version) Thoroughness: High Understanding: High
by git.jcg.re/jcgruenhage/crev-proofs.git on 2021-02-15
This review is from Crev, a distributed system for code reviews. To add your review, set up cargo-crev
.
The current version of slug is 0.1.6.
0.1.4 (older version) Thoroughness: High Understanding: High
by git.jcg.re/jcgruenhage/crev-proofs.git on 2021-02-15
These reviews are from cargo-vet. To add your review, set up cargo-vet
and submit your URL to its registry.
The current version of slug is 0.1.6.
0.1.4 (older version)
From kornelski/crev-proofs copy of salsa.debian.org.
Packaged for Debian (stable). Changelog:
0.1.4 (older version)
From kornelski/crev-proofs copy of git.savannah.gnu.org.
Packaged for Guix (crates-io)
cargo-vet does not verify reviewers' identity. You have to fully trust the source the audits are from.
This crate can be compiled, run, and tested on a local workstation or in controlled automation without surprising consequences. More…
May have been packaged automatically without a review
Lib.rs has been able to verify that all files in the crate's tarball are in the crate's repository with a git tag matching the version. Please note that this check is still in beta, and absence of this confirmation does not mean that the files don't match.
Crates in the crates.io registry are tarball snapshots uploaded by crates' publishers. The registry is not using crates' git repositories, so there is a possibility that published crates have a misleading repository URL, or contain different code from the code in the repository.
To review the actual code of the crate, it's best to use cargo crev open slug
. Alternatively, you can download the tarball of slug v0.1.6 or view the source online.
Short and concise implementation. A little code that's technically unsafe, for lowercasing ASCII, as Rust's
to_lowercase()
impl is slower because it's unicode aware. As it doesn't have to handle unicode where it's used, it is still sound.Aside of it's own code, there is unsafe in the deps too: If
deunicode
is fine, then this is too. I didn't invest enough time indeunicode
to make a final judgement about it, but others have so it's probably okay.