Biden administration seems oblivious of the strengths of contemporary C++ and the efforts to provide strong safety guarantees, Bjarne Stroustrup said.
  • witx@lemmy.sdf.org
    9·
    8 months ago

    I have worked with fairly large c++ codebases: It’s totally possible to write much safer code than it ever was and I actually enjoy modern c++. Still it’s still a burden and mishaps can and will happen. The time for the c++ committee to show they can overcome the language’s issues has passed IMHO there are much better, and more expressive, alternatives.

    I don’t believe in the whole model of releasing a standard every 3 years and then taking who knows how long to implement it, and not braking compatibility. that shit just hinders the language. With all this said I don’t think c++ is going to die any time soon.

    • lysdexic@programming.devOPMEnglish
      2·
      8 months ago

      The time for the c++ committee to show they can overcome the language’s issues has passed IMHO there are much better, and more expressive, alternatives.

      I’m not sure if this is a good take.

      Languages deemed “safe” boil down to two features: supporting specific memory management strategies, and adding static code analysis checks that enforce rules and best practices.

      Can’t this be done already without involving committees?

      • TechNom (nobody)@programming.devEnglish
        3·
        8 months ago

        That works only if memory safety is optional. Additions of the language features needed for mandatory memory safety are backwards incompatible.