14 ms·

>> Actually now is the time to learn C++. Amount of leverage and money C++ developers will be able to utilize is enormous, given how much critical code is writt

>> Actually now is the time to learn C++. Amount of leverage and money C++ developers will be able to utilize is enormous, given how much critical code is written in it. The article states: "We continue to invest in tools to improve the safety of our C/C++. ... Vulnerabilities found using these tools contributed both to prevention of vulnerabilities in new code as well as vulnerabilities found in old code that are included in the above evaluation." "These are important tools, and critically important for our C/C++ code. However, these alone do not account for the large shift in vulnerabilities that we’re seeing, and other projects that have deployed these technologies have not seen a major shift in their vulnerability composition. We believe Android’s ongoing shift from memory-unsafe to memory-safe languages is a major factor." "our Rust code is proving to be significantly safer than pure C/C++ implementations." C++ is great if you do not have alternatives. If you can use Rust instead of C / C++, you should because of the greater safety it offers with similar performance characteristics.

maeln 4y ago
I think he meant it in a way the same way that some people are still learning COBOL: a lot of critical, legacy code is written in C++ and cannot easily (or won't be for various reason) moved to another langage. Therefore, developer that can maintain a C++ codebase might become invaluable for some company.
- Thiez 4y ago
  The COBOL developers might be invaluable, but statistically their pay does not reflect this at all. Is there any reason to believe it will be different for C++, if it were to become a legacy language?
  - wiseowise 4y ago
    COBOL never penetrated use cases that C++ covers.
cwyers 4y ago
I believe what the post you're replying to is implying is, there's a ton of C++ code in the world that isn't going to be ported to Rust, and someone is going to have to fix all of those bugs in C++ code already in the wild. So you can get paid to be that person.
- thesuperbigfrog 4y ago
  >> there's a ton of C++ code in the world that isn't going to be ported to Rust, and someone is going to have to fix all of those bugs in C++ code already in the wild. So you can get paid to be that person. That is well and good for legacy systems that cannot / will not be updated. Android is not a legacy system and is adopting Rust and seeing security benefits. Linux is not a legacy system and is slowly adopting Rust and may see greater use with time. Time will tell, but so far the future is optimistic.
  - depereo 4y ago
    They do say in the article that they are uninterested in rewriting existing c/c++ code in new languages. There will continue to be c/c++ applications that will need new features, new bug fixes and new development for decades. Some of the most fundamental code on the planet for the most critical systems are written in those languages. Also a lot of video game development leans heavily on c++ in particular and that's not going to change very quickly. Big or small enterprise hardware vendors won't change to new languages overnight, abandoning potentially decades of system building experience and supporting processes. There's a cost to even being able to run rust alongside your c/c++ code. Some places may never switch or enable interoperability even for new products. Learning c/c++ will still be lucrative and a good idea today.
  - netr0ute 4y ago
    > Android is not a legacy system and is adopting Rust and seeing security benefits. > Linux is not a legacy system and is slowly adopting Rust and may see greater use with time. 100% USDA Grade-A Certified Prime BS, as shown by both projects' ages (15+, 30+ years) and maybe the definition of legacy. If you consider legacy to be something you have to keep a certain way so that it functions a certain way, then both are basically legacy technologies. What isn't legacy? I would say projects like Fuchsia and Rust itself aren't legacy because you can move fast and break things there. This also means stuff like C++ is legacy, so there's that too.

maeln 4y ago

I think he meant it in a way the same way that some people are still learning COBOL: a lot of critical, legacy code is written in C++ and cannot easily (or won't be for various reason) moved to another langage. Therefore, developer that can maintain a C++ codebase might become invaluable for some company.

Thiez 4y ago
The COBOL developers might be invaluable, but statistically their pay does not reflect this at all. Is there any reason to believe it will be different for C++, if it were to become a legacy language?
- wiseowise 4y ago
  COBOL never penetrated use cases that C++ covers.

cwyers 4y ago

I believe what the post you're replying to is implying is, there's a ton of C++ code in the world that isn't going to be ported to Rust, and someone is going to have to fix all of those bugs in C++ code already in the wild. So you can get paid to be that person.

thesuperbigfrog 4y ago
>> there's a ton of C++ code in the world that isn't going to be ported to Rust, and someone is going to have to fix all of those bugs in C++ code already in the wild. So you can get paid to be that person. That is well and good for legacy systems that cannot / will not be updated. Android is not a legacy system and is adopting Rust and seeing security benefits. Linux is not a legacy system and is slowly adopting Rust and may see greater use with time. Time will tell, but so far the future is optimistic.
- depereo 4y ago
  They do say in the article that they are uninterested in rewriting existing c/c++ code in new languages. There will continue to be c/c++ applications that will need new features, new bug fixes and new development for decades. Some of the most fundamental code on the planet for the most critical systems are written in those languages. Also a lot of video game development leans heavily on c++ in particular and that's not going to change very quickly. Big or small enterprise hardware vendors won't change to new languages overnight, abandoning potentially decades of system building experience and supporting processes. There's a cost to even being able to run rust alongside your c/c++ code. Some places may never switch or enable interoperability even for new products. Learning c/c++ will still be lucrative and a good idea today.
- netr0ute 4y ago
  > Android is not a legacy system and is adopting Rust and seeing security benefits. > Linux is not a legacy system and is slowly adopting Rust and may see greater use with time. 100% USDA Grade-A Certified Prime BS, as shown by both projects' ages (15+, 30+ years) and maybe the definition of legacy. If you consider legacy to be something you have to keep a certain way so that it functions a certain way, then both are basically legacy technologies. What isn't legacy? I would say projects like Fuchsia and Rust itself aren't legacy because you can move fast and break things there. This also means stuff like C++ is legacy, so there's that too.