3 ms·

You cannot make C++ secure and safe with a library.

• fooker 9y ago
  If you state your criteria for 'safe' and 'secure', I can point you towards library implementations for each of your points. You can not stop the users from shooting themselves in the foot, but that is not the goal here. We want to enable 'safe and secure' programming, not develop toy idiot-proof write-only languages that are useless for large projects.
  • willtim 9y ago
    > You can not stop the users from shooting themselves in the foot, but that is not the goal here. It should be the goal. Even experts make mistakes. This is why static type systems exist. The logical thing to do is to strengthen the type system to prevent more classes of errors.
    • fooker 9y ago
      And yet you always need to provide users an way out for the sake of pragmatism. Examples: Rust's unsafe block, Haskell's Unsafe.Coerce, etc. If the user avoids the analogous features in C++ and stick to modern conventions, it is not less safe/secure.