Code Quality Analysis of Translations from C to Rust

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.00840v1
• Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2026 18:12:03 GMT
• Title: Code Quality Analysis of Translations from C to Rust
• Authors: Biruk Tadesse, Vikram Nitin, Mazin Salah, Baishakhi Ray, Marcelo d'Amorim, Wesley Assunção,
• Abstract summary: C/C++ is a prevalent programming language. Yet, it suffers from significant memory and thread-safety issues.<n>Recent studies have explored automated translation of C/C++ to safer languages, such as Rust.<n>This work investigates strengths and weaknesses of three C-to-Rust translators, namely C2Rust (a transpiler), C2SaferRust (an LLM-guided transpiler), and TranslationGym.
• Score: 10.42011095909225
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: C/C++ is a prevalent programming language. Yet, it suffers from significant memory and thread-safety issues. Recent studies have explored automated translation of C/C++ to safer languages, such as Rust. However, these studies focused mostly on the correctness and safety of the translated code, which are indeed critical, but they left other important quality concerns (e.g., performance, robustness, and maintainability) largely unexplored. This work investigates strengths and weaknesses of three C-to-Rust translators, namely C2Rust (a transpiler), C2SaferRust (an LLM-guided transpiler), and TranslationGym (an LLM-based direct translation). We perform an in-depth quantitative and qualitative analysis of several important quality attributes for the translated Rust code of the popular GNU coreutils, using human-based translation as a baseline. To assess the internal and external quality of the Rust code, we: (i) apply Clippy, a rule-based state-of-the-practice Rust static analysis tool; (ii) investigate the capability of an LLM (GPT-4o) to identify issues potentially overlooked by Clippy; and (iii) perform a manual analysis of the issues reported by Clippy and GPT-4o. Our results show that while newer techniques reduce some unsafe and non-idiomatic patterns, they frequently introduce new issues, revealing systematic trade-offs that are not visible under existing evaluation practices. Notably, none of the automated techniques consistently match or exceed human-written translations across all quality dimensions, yet even human-written Rust code exhibits persistent internal quality issues such as readability and non-idiomatic patterns. Together, these findings show that translation quality remains a multi-dimensional challenge, requiring systematic evaluation and targeted tool support beyond both naive automation and manual rewriting.

Related papers

• Evaluating Extremely Low-Resource Machine Translation: A Comparative Study of ChrF++ and BLEU Metrics [69.2321983942375]
  This work presents a comparative analysis of BLEU, an n-gram-based metric, and ChrF++, a character-based metric, for MT evaluation in ELRL settings.<n>We examine how each metric responds to translation artifacts, including hallucinations, repetition, source-text copying, and diacritic (textitmatra) variations across three ELRLs: Magahi, Bhojpuri, and Chhattisgarhi.<n>While recent work often relies solely on ChrF++, our findings show that BLEU, despite its lower absolute scores, provides complementary lexical-precision insights that improve interpretability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-19T14:56:42Z)
• Feedback Loops and Code Perturbations in LLM-based Software Engineering: A Case Study on a C-to-Rust Translation System [1.2566563622834341]
  We study the effect of three variables on an automated C-to-Rust translation system.<n>Our results show that without feedback loops LLM selection has a large effect on translation success.<n>We also identify that diversity provided by code perturbations can even result in improved system performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-02T09:38:20Z)
• Training Language Models to Generate Quality Code with Program Analysis Feedback [66.0854002147103]
  Code generation with large language models (LLMs) is increasingly adopted in production but fails to ensure code quality.<n>We propose REAL, a reinforcement learning framework that incentivizes LLMs to generate production-quality code.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-28T17:57:47Z)
• SafeTrans: LLM-assisted Transpilation from C to Rust [5.6274106543826585]
  Rust is a strong contender for a memory-safe alternative to C as a "systems" programming language.<n>In this paper, we evaluate the potential of large language models (LLMs) to automate the transpilation of C code to Rust.<n>We present the design and implementation of SafeTrans, a framework that uses LLMs to i) transpile C code into Rust and ii) iteratively fix any compilation and runtime errors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-15T21:05:33Z)
• CRUST-Bench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for C-to-safe-Rust Transpilation [51.18863297461463]
  CRUST-Bench is a dataset of 100 C repositories, each paired with manually-written interfaces in safe Rust as well as test cases.<n>We evaluate state-of-the-art large language models (LLMs) on this task and find that safe and idiomatic Rust generation is still a challenging problem.<n>The best performing model, OpenAI o1, is able to solve only 15 tasks in a single-shot setting.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-21T17:33:33Z)
• Do LLMs Understand Your Translations? Evaluating Paragraph-level MT with Question Answering [68.3400058037817]
  We introduce TREQA (Translation Evaluation via Question-Answering), a framework that extrinsically evaluates translation quality.<n>We show that TREQA is competitive with and, in some cases, outperforms state-of-the-art neural and LLM-based metrics in ranking alternative paragraph-level translations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-10T09:24:54Z)
• RustMap: Towards Project-Scale C-to-Rust Migration via Program Analysis and LLM [13.584956125542396]
  Rust offers superior memory safety while maintaining C's high performance.<n>Existing automated translation tools, such as C2Rust, may rely too much on syntactic, template-based translation.<n>This paper introduces a novel dependency-guided and large language model (LLM)-based C-to-Rust translation approach, RustMap.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-22T11:57:45Z)
• LLM-Driven Multi-step Translation from C to Rust using Static Analysis [27.122409727034192]
  Translating software written in legacy languages to modern languages, such as C to Rust, has significant benefits in improving memory safety.<n>We propose SACTOR, an LLM-driven C-to-Rust zero-shot translation tool using a two-step translation methodology.<n>SACTOR produces more natural and Rust-compliant translations compared to existing methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-16T14:05:26Z)
• Syzygy: Dual Code-Test C to (safe) Rust Translation using LLMs and Dynamic Analysis [8.361424157571468]
  Syzygy is an automated approach to translate C to safe Rust.<n>This is the largest automated and test-validated C to safe Rust code translation achieved so far.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-18T18:55:46Z)
• INDICT: Code Generation with Internal Dialogues of Critiques for Both Security and Helpfulness [110.6921470281479]
  We introduce INDICT: a new framework that empowers large language models with Internal Dialogues of Critiques for both safety and helpfulness guidance. The internal dialogue is a dual cooperative system between a safety-driven critic and a helpfulness-driven critic. We observed that our approach can provide an advanced level of critiques of both safety and helpfulness analysis, significantly improving the quality of output codes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-23T15:55:07Z)
• Measuring Uncertainty in Translation Quality Evaluation (TQE) [62.997667081978825]
  This work carries out motivated research to correctly estimate the confidence intervals citeBrown_etal2001Interval depending on the sample size of the translated text. The methodology we applied for this work is from Bernoulli Statistical Distribution Modelling (BSDM) and Monte Carlo Sampling Analysis (MCSA)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-11-15T12:09:08Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.