4 ms·
It's quite obvious to me that the C++ folks running the committee didn't care about safety much. How can they standardise `std::span` knowing it's unsafe? They
by coffeeaddict1 2y ago
It's quite obvious to me that the C++ folks running the committee didn't care about safety much. How can they standardise `std::span` knowing it's unsafe?
They care now (well they pretend at least) because Rust is going to take significant market share in domains where C++ is still king.
- pjmlp 2y agoRust isn't the reason, rather governments are now serious about security, just like in any other industry.
- coffeeaddict1 2y agoWell yes and no. Rust is the reason because it's a real memory-safe alternative for system programming. If it didn't exist, governments would give C and C++ a "pass" for being memory unsafe.
- pjmlp 2y agoExcept, Rust is never mentioned alone on cybersecurity advisories, the anti safety folks are the ones doing that.
- aninteger 2y agoMeh.. I kind of don't think so. The reason you and I keep ending up on haveibeenpwned has likely nothing to do with Rust or C++.
- pjmlp 2y agoIndeed it has to do with lack of liability, but it will come. And then evolution will take care of which programming ecosystem are less expensive to result in lawsuits, or invalidation of insurance policies.
- 3836293648 2y agoThey didn't just standardise it when it was unsafe. They got a proposal for a safe span and demanded that safety be removed before they'd accept it