5 ms·

> I would call C++ a memory safe language C++ is not, in any sense, a memory safe language.

• bluGill 6y ago
  Then you don't know anything about C++, only the C legacy it is built on. Modern C++ has good data structures and good memory management. To be fair actually using those features of C++ instead of the C legacy is still catching on. Most instructors aren't even teaching it. Using C in C++ is like using unsafe everywhere in rust - you can do it, but you lose all the advantages.
  • floatboth 6y ago
    Memory safety is not about what a language has. It's about all the things a language doesn't have, doesn't allow.
    • deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
  • Liquid_Fire 6y ago
    Even if you stick to "modern C++" and never use C-style pointers, arrays, enums or unions, it is still trivial to have memory errors in C++.
    • deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
  • rcxdude 6y ago
    This is a common viewpoint but also wrong. There's plenty of ways to invoke memory unsafety in 'modern' C++: iterator invalidation is probably the biggest source.
    • bluGill 6y ago
      While you are technically correct, those who study C++ security note that those are a tiny minority of all security errors. Still an issue, but not nearly as common an issue as the ones that come from the C roots of C++.
      • rational_indian 6y ago
        No true Scotsman huh? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman Also can you link to an example of this purported memory safe C++ compiler? Please note for an apples to apples comparison it must reject all memory unsafe non-modern C++ constructs.
      • mccr8 6y ago
        Iterator invalidation was the cause of a Firefox zero day in 2016. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1321066 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1321066
  • varajelle 6y ago
    std::string_view xx = something_that_returns_a_std_string(); use(xx); //oops