uecker

38 ms·

871.
by uecker 1y ago
IMHO the reason is that these languages are industry-funded efforts. And they are not funded to help the free software community. Step-by-step this reshapes the open-source world to serve other interests.
872.
by uecker 1y ago
You would need to opt-in into zig first, which is more effort than opting into modern C when you come from C.
873.
by uecker 1y ago
This is not what I said, but memory safety is certainly not anything which is a high priority for my own security. I still think memory safety is important and I also think Rust is an interesting language, but... the hype is exaggerated an
874.
by uecker 1y ago
We might also have different priorities. I do not care too much that google and apple want to lock down their smartphone spyware and sales platforms. The supply chain risks and maintenance burden imposed onto me by the Rust ecosystem are m
875.
by uecker 1y ago
By not getting timely security updates: https://www.debian.org/releases/trixie/release-notes/issues....
876.
by uecker 1y ago
If you write a modern style of C, you can have bounds checked code and do not need to use void pointers. I usually find that people overestimate the advantages of newer languages compared to using C by comparing to old and badly written C
877.
by uecker 1y ago
I am physicist and like to look at data instead of the press and opinons. Let's summarize the facts: * Renewables did not cause an increase of gas usage for electricity production in Germany. The data clearly shows that it stayed ar
878.
by uecker 1y ago
The "Russian gas" argument is so grotesque also because Germany quickly stopped important gas from Russia after the start of the attack on Ukraine, but neither Europe nor the US has stopped importing nuclear fuel from Russia.
879.
by uecker 1y ago
Come, please do not repeat all this nonsense from the tabloids. First, you need to specify what prices you talk about. If you talk about household prices, then yes those increased. This, btw, was also intentional. The system was designed in
880.
by uecker 1y ago
The money Germany "wasted" on renewables brought down prices a lot, triggering massive investments, which was the plan. My prediction is that even France will scale down nuclear power for fiscal reasons alone - they would need to
881.
by uecker 1y ago
Just that it is used does not mean it is economically viable if the government is deeply involved - which is the case in France.
882.
by uecker 1y ago
They have plenty of downsides and only one very minor advantage: You need to copy only a single file instead of two into your source. I am still puzzled why anybody could think this is a good idea...
883.
by uecker 1y ago
This works with new attributes as far as I know.
884.
by uecker 1y ago
You can just define a span type yourself: https://uecker.codeberg.page/2025-07-02.html What new clang feature are you talking about?
885.
by uecker 1y ago
We removed 30% of UB in the core language already for C2y and are in progress of removing more, so there is no "infinite growth of ever hard to avoid UB". For many UB the right way is indeed to panic and in C you can often achiev
886.
by uecker 1y ago
This is super nice!
887.
by uecker 1y ago
Cherenkov radiation shows that FTL is possible in a medium where light is slowed down below a the maximum possible speed allowed by special relativity. It does not show that FTL as usually understood is possible.
888.
by uecker 1y ago
Who would use a file system which essentially seems to be developed by a single person? A bus-factor of one seems unacceptable for a FS. But maybe I am wrong and there are other developers, then why do they not take over upstreaming if th
889.
by uecker 1y ago
I would not say we agree with respect to your last point. I think also very complex C programs can be made memory safe, when this is a design goal from the beginning. That complexity can make this harder is true also for Rust, where people
890.
by uecker 1y ago
Maybe, but I do not see according to which definition of 'fork' C++ before its standardization in 1998 could be considered a fork. It was an extension.
891.
by uecker 1y ago
Maybe, but it is 1995 when it diverged: https://isocpp.org/wiki/faq/c Before it was an extension since then it is a fork.
892.
by uecker 1y ago
I switched to C because I could not stand the pain of using C++ anymore. I find C refreshingly simple. (Also, as a comment to other responses: C++ is not a superset of C, it is a fork from 95 with divergent language evolution since then).
893.
by uecker 1y ago
The real-world is complex with many trade-offs. The real question if in a 1:1 comparable situation and using similar efforts, you could achieve good memory safety in C. I believe this to be the case. I think the statistics we have seen are
894.
by uecker 1y ago
It is also not "extremely difficult" to avoid memory-safety issues in most code, although I agree that Rust has a clear advantage. Essentially you need to have a clear policy on memory ownership and avoid pointer arithmetic by us
895.
by uecker 1y ago
To be precise, it was "C is entirely as complicated as Rust, if your goal is to write correct software that doesn't crash all the time." and I think we wouldn't have this discussion if it were uncontroversial. As someb
896.
by uecker 1y ago
Bias is a good keyword with respect to CVEs. As long as there is not much Rust code which is relevant to my daily life I think this is not comparable. And the few Rust packages which now ended up on my system, see no regular security suppor
897.
by uecker 1y ago
I also write C all the time, and it does not crash. There are certainly memory safety concerns with C, but there are also certainly many programmers that can write C code that does not crash all the time.
898.
by uecker 1y ago
Most software I use daily on my Linux system is actually written in C and I can't remember any of it crashing in the last decade or so.
899.
by uecker 1y ago
Yes, I also love writing C.
900.
by uecker 1y ago
Yes, but also because he made it work well for him. He also understands that most of the innovations in programming languages is actually not nearly as useful as people think and often does more harm than good. Rejecting newer C standards

More ›