4 ms·
I have been feeling that way ever since two years ago when I first looked at the language. I still don't understand why this language has such popularity. It's
by arbre 10y ago
I have been feeling that way ever since two years ago when I first looked at the language. I still don't understand why this language has such popularity. It's really bad for the reasons mentioned. C++ is a solid language where you can do everything you want and also write memory safe code in a clean way with unique_ptr. C++ is not perfect but to me no alternative come close yet, rust and go comprised.
- steveklabnik 10y agoC++ is not memory safe, and neither is uniq_ptr. Use after move on one causes a segfault. (Actually IIRC it's UB, but it usually manifests as a segfault)
- trimbo 10y agoIt looks like clang-tidy just committed a check for this case: https://reviews.llvm.org/D23353 https://reviews.llvm.org/D23353
- steveklabnik 10y agoNot exactly this case. From the link: > No warnings are emitted for objects of type ``std::unique_ptr`` and > ``std::shared_ptr``, as they have defined move behavior. Regardless, I am happy to see more static checking for C++, and am following the GSL/Core Guidelines closely. It's important work.
- plandis 10y agoYou can write clean safe code in C++, Rust tries to turn that can to a must.
- pcwalton 10y agoC++ is not memory safe. unique ptr provides no protection against dangling references. Besides, you cannot use unique ptr to make backreferences, which is what this article is complaining about.