4 ms·

Obviously I have no hard data on the reliability of new C programs, but things like git (which I at least find pretty reliable) may serve as counter point to th

• rkangel 15y ago
  Don't forget that only the core of Git is C, the rest is big pile of shell scripts, and (I believe) perl.
  • burgerbrain 15y ago
    This is not particularly the case. Things with git are initially implemented as shell scripts, as a way of "just getting it done", but are later migrated to C. These days a very large portion of Git is straight C.
  • davvid 15y ago
    Much of the early git scripts (e.g. git-pull) have been rewritten in C. Performance is one reason. Helping out win32 (where fork+exec is slow) is another. $ ls -1 git-*.sh | wc -l 25 $ ls -1 git-*.perl | wc -l 9 Compare this to the built-in commands: $ ls -1 builtin/*.c | wc -l 92 or all the C files: $ git ls-files '*.c' | wc -l 306
• nl 15y ago
  I suspect the authors of Git are - on average - more competent than the average developer.