seth@lemmy.world to Programming@programming.dev · edit-28 months agoC++ creator rebuts White House warningwww.infoworld.comexternal-linkmessage-square97fedilinkarrow-up1157arrow-down112file-textcross-posted to: [email protected][email protected]
arrow-up1145arrow-down1external-linkC++ creator rebuts White House warningwww.infoworld.comseth@lemmy.world to Programming@programming.dev · edit-28 months agomessage-square97fedilinkfile-textcross-posted to: [email protected][email protected]
minus-squaremarcos@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up19arrow-down6·8 months ago C++ is leagues above C in this regard. It’s really not. It has the same flaws, some libraries that promise to avoid them (as long as you don’t hold them wrong - what every single programmer does), and lots and lots of new flaws that may come from anywhere.
minus-squarevext01@lemmy.sdf.orglinkfedilinkarrow-up5arrow-down2·8 months agoI use C, C++ and Rust in my dayjob. I don’t like C++, but I disagree with your statement. C++ has: a string type, which sidesteps error prone buffer juggling. smart pointers for scope based deallocation. generic data types. No more hand rolling list and mapping types with void *. It’s obviously still not a fully memory safe language, but it has some perks over C. I’d still much rather be using rust (most of the time).
It’s really not. It has the same flaws, some libraries that promise to avoid them (as long as you don’t hold them wrong - what every single programmer does), and lots and lots of new flaws that may come from anywhere.
I use C, C++ and Rust in my dayjob.
I don’t like C++, but I disagree with your statement.
C++ has:
It’s obviously still not a fully memory safe language, but it has some perks over C. I’d still much rather be using rust (most of the time).