As James Mickens says in The Night Watch[1], “Why would someone write code in a grotesque language that exposes raw memory addresses? Why not use a modern la

As James Mickens says in The Night Watch[1], “Why would someone write code in a grotesque language that exposes raw memory addresses? Why not use a modern language with garbage collection and functional programming and free massages after lunch?” Here’s the answer: Pointers are real. They’re what the hardware understands. Somebody has to deal with them. You can’t just place a LISP book on top of an x86 chip and hope that the hardware learns about lambda calculus by osmosis. But I feel there's a middle ground between LISP and raw assembly and mangling pointers. For instance, modern C++ and Rust (and all the C++ 'successors', like Carbon, Circle, Safe C++, etc) have a very novel and clear set of ownership, view, and span semantics that make more declarative, functional, side-effect-free programming easy to write and read, while still maintaining high-performance—most notably without unnecessarily throwing copies around. A few days ago a friend was asking me for a HPC problem: he'd written a bog-standard nested for loop with indices, was observing poor performance, and asked me if using C++23 std::ranges::views would help. It did, but I also fundamentally reworked his data flow. I saw something like a 5x performance improvement, even though I was writing at a higher level of abstraction than he was. [1]: https://www.usenix.org/system/files/1311_05-08_mickens.pdf https://www.usenix.org/system/files/1311_05-08_mickens.pdf