4 ms·
C/C++ isn't the issue, it's the lack of not using memory-safe features like smart pointers which you'll need C++ for.
by netr0ute 5y ago
C/C++ isn't the issue, it's the lack of not using memory-safe features like smart pointers which you'll need C++ for.
- nathanaldensr 5y agoWhile you're technically correct, your ignoring the pragmatic truth: most developers are terrible and should never write code. Because of this reality, C/C++ and all its footguns are something to be avoided unless there is no other alternative (usually this happens when integrating with legacy software or in industries like gaming where the switching costs are extreme).
- junon 5y agoSo you're saying that since we're encouraging people to flood the market with little to no skill, we should instead accommodate them with Baby's First Programming Language and then force all of the other developers to follow the same methodology? This makes no sense. It just sounds like Go.
- agumonkey 5y agoterrible programmers ain't nothing new though and large corp in critical fields are aware of that and have (or had) structural mitigations (slow and heavy processes, regulations etc)
- xaduha 5y agoGuns don't kill people, people kill people.
- catlifeonmars 5y agoPointers kill people
- gabereiser 5y agonull pointers kill people
- ndesaulniers 5y agoDangling pointers kill people.
- kumarjsingh6 5y agoredditizing HN kills people
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- scintill76 5y ago“We kill people based on memory safety.” - Michael Hayden, probably
- IshKebab 5y agoThis is sort of true, but show me a (non-trivial) C++ program that doesn't resort to naked pointers or references at some point. In the real world, smart pointers help a lot and are a great idea but they don't fully solve the problem in the same way that Rust or memory safe languages do.