3 ms·

As an analogy, you can write safe code in assembler as well if you and your team are incredibly disciplined and only interact with libraries written with a simi

As an analogy, you can write safe code in assembler as well if you and your team are incredibly disciplined and only interact with libraries written with a similar amount of discipline. The appeal of alternatives is you can write safe code with a fraction of the discipline and mental effort required.

claudius 11y ago
There is no extra “discipline“ or “mental effort” required to write safe C++. Don’t use new/delete/free/malloc and don’t use operator&. Of course, you can say that we might as well remove them from the language entirely, but I really don’t think it takes extra effort not to use them.
- keyneus 11y ago
  C++14: auto p = std::make_unique<int>(5); auto q = std::move(p); std::cout << *p << std::endl; Segfault using the “safe” C++ features. I'm a fan of modern C++, but it's not safe (in a Rust sense) even if you stick to C++11/C++14 features.
  - steveklabnik 11y ago
    For comparison, the same thing in Rust: fn main() { let p = Box::new(5); let q = p; println!("{}", p); } gives, upon compiling: error: use of moved value: `p` [E0382] println!("{}", p); ^ note: in this expansion of format_args! note: in this expansion of print! (defined in <std macros>) note: in this expansion of println! (defined in <std macros>) help: run `rustc --explain E0382` to see a detailed explanation note: `p` moved here because it has type `Box<i32>`, which is moved by default let q = p; ^ help: if you would like to borrow the value instead, use a `ref` binding as shown: let ref q = p; error: aborting due to previous error Running `rustc --explain E0382` or going to https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/error-index.html#E0382 https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/error-index.html#E0382 gives you an extended error message as well.
- seanwilson 11y ago
  There are countless ways of causing undefined behaviour in C++ (not including memory management mistakes) as well as platform specific behaviour that you don't see in other languages. It's a very complex language to master compared to alternatives.
  - eru 11y ago
    See eg http://blog.regehr.org/archives/140 http://blog.regehr.org/archives/140
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]

claudius 11y ago

There is no extra “discipline“ or “mental effort” required to write safe C++. Don’t use new/delete/free/malloc and don’t use operator&. Of course, you can say that we might as well remove them from the language entirely, but I really don’t think it takes extra effort not to use them.

keyneus 11y ago
C++14: auto p = std::make_unique<int>(5); auto q = std::move(p); std::cout << *p << std::endl; Segfault using the “safe” C++ features. I'm a fan of modern C++, but it's not safe (in a Rust sense) even if you stick to C++11/C++14 features.
- steveklabnik 11y ago
  For comparison, the same thing in Rust: fn main() { let p = Box::new(5); let q = p; println!("{}", p); } gives, upon compiling: error: use of moved value: `p` [E0382] println!("{}", p); ^ note: in this expansion of format_args! note: in this expansion of print! (defined in <std macros>) note: in this expansion of println! (defined in <std macros>) help: run `rustc --explain E0382` to see a detailed explanation note: `p` moved here because it has type `Box<i32>`, which is moved by default let q = p; ^ help: if you would like to borrow the value instead, use a `ref` binding as shown: let ref q = p; error: aborting due to previous error Running `rustc --explain E0382` or going to https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/error-index.html#E0382 https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/error-index.html#E0382 gives you an extended error message as well.
seanwilson 11y ago
There are countless ways of causing undefined behaviour in C++ (not including memory management mistakes) as well as platform specific behaviour that you don't see in other languages. It's a very complex language to master compared to alternatives.
- eru 11y ago
  See eg http://blog.regehr.org/archives/140 http://blog.regehr.org/archives/140
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]