4 ms·
Can you clarify what you disagree with in the article? The author wasn't saying programmers need to understand all the complexities of pointers to write good co
by SubjectToChange 6y ago
Can you clarify what you disagree with in the article? The author wasn't saying programmers need to understand all the complexities of pointers to write good code, nor was he saying anything about the quality of those languages.
Also, it is incredibility defensive to accuse the author of "attacking under the belt" when his observation wasn't aimed at any specific language.
- stephc_int13 6y agoFrom my opinion, this is a way to try and push the adoption of Rust by shading an unpleasant light on the current contender : C/C++ An other way to say is that this is propaganda.
- steveklabnik 6y agoThat doesn’t make sense, given: > Both parts of this statement are false, at least in languages with unsafe features like Rust or C: The two languages share these features, which is the whole reason this is being written in the first place.
- stephc_int13 6y agoUnsafe as a language feature is something that was invented by the Rust design team. And I don't think there is much value to this concept. This is like calling code "ugly" and saying that's a feature. Pointers are not unsafe.