3 ms·

How does any other language deal with POSIX standard I/O streams or the lack thereof? Definitely not a C++ or exceptions problem. Which language lets you compil

How does any other language deal with POSIX standard I/O streams or the lack thereof? Definitely not a C++ or exceptions problem. Which language lets you compile a "Hello, World!" program and then execute it against a non-POSIX-compatible environment and get the correct output... somewhere? If you're executing against a POSIX-compatible environment, then stdin, stdout, and stderr are expected to exist and be configured properly if you want them to work[1]. If you're executing against some other environment, like webassembly or an embedded system, then you'll already (hopefully) be using some logging and error handling approach that sends output to the correct place. Doesn't matter if you're using C, C++, .NET, Rust, Zig, etc. For example, webassembly is an environment without stdio streams. It's your responsibility to make sure there is a proper way to record output, even if it's just a compatibility layer that goes to console.log. [1]: https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9799919799/functions/stdin.html https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9799919799/functions/s...

tialaramex 2y ago
The other languages do not (as my parent claimed) write stacktraces to a log somehow. I suspect that in reality they've ommitted to explain that they're expected to write all the C++ code to make that stacktrace and write it to a log, but once you add those steps you're back to parity with Rust, the Rust programmers can write a stacktrace to a log too. In the specific case of "Hello, World" it's more embarrassing. The Rust Hello World does indeed experience and report errors if there are any, the canonical C just ignores them, as does the C++.
- HumanOstrich 2y ago
  > The Rust Hello World does indeed experience and report errors if there are any, the canonical C just ignores them, as does the C++. Can you give an example for each of those?
  - tialaramex 2y ago
    https://github.com/sunfishcode/hello-world-vs-io-errors?tab=readme-ov-file https://github.com/sunfishcode/hello-world-vs-io-errors?tab=...
    - HumanOstrich 2y ago
      Thank you for providing a reference. After reading the blog post on that page, I'm even less convinced that your point is useful. I don't think it's a bug if, like in the C example, you don't handle the return value of the function you are calling. The strace shows that the function returned an error, but the code doesn't check it. Not a language flaw. In fact, in most of the languages that "don't have the bug", the runtime is automagically capturing the issue and aborting the program. Like an exception. Rust just "doesn't have the bug" because the compiler forces you to handle the error. All the .NET languages do the same thing at runtime and force you to handle the I/O error... with an exception handler. Unfortunately, your talking points just seem like more Rust fanaticism trying to discredit any other language. This happens in every single discussion about any language other than Rust, especially C/C++. I'm not going to engage any further.

tialaramex 2y ago

The other languages do not (as my parent claimed) write stacktraces to a log somehow. I suspect that in reality they've ommitted to explain that they're expected to write all the C++ code to make that stacktrace and write it to a log, but once you add those steps you're back to parity with Rust, the Rust programmers can write a stacktrace to a log too. In the specific case of "Hello, World" it's more embarrassing. The Rust Hello World does indeed experience and report errors if there are any, the canonical C just ignores them, as does the C++.

HumanOstrich 2y ago
> The Rust Hello World does indeed experience and report errors if there are any, the canonical C just ignores them, as does the C++. Can you give an example for each of those?
- tialaramex 2y ago
  https://github.com/sunfishcode/hello-world-vs-io-errors?tab=readme-ov-file https://github.com/sunfishcode/hello-world-vs-io-errors?tab=...
  - HumanOstrich 2y ago
    Thank you for providing a reference. After reading the blog post on that page, I'm even less convinced that your point is useful. I don't think it's a bug if, like in the C example, you don't handle the return value of the function you are calling. The strace shows that the function returned an error, but the code doesn't check it. Not a language flaw. In fact, in most of the languages that "don't have the bug", the runtime is automagically capturing the issue and aborting the program. Like an exception. Rust just "doesn't have the bug" because the compiler forces you to handle the error. All the .NET languages do the same thing at runtime and force you to handle the I/O error... with an exception handler. Unfortunately, your talking points just seem like more Rust fanaticism trying to discredit any other language. This happens in every single discussion about any language other than Rust, especially C/C++. I'm not going to engage any further.