Biden administration seems oblivious of the strengths of contemporary C++ and the efforts to provide strong safety guarantees, Bjarne Stroustrup said.

Python is memory safe? Can’t you access/address memory with C bindings?

  • mox@lemmy.sdf.org
    20·
    8 months ago

    One can’t rescue a design by just adding things to it (regardless of the kind of design), that’s just a simple truth.

    This statement could also be applied to Perl, PHP, JavaScript, and most other languages that eventually add new ways of doing things, especially if they preserve backward compatibility. I’m not sure that this is a condemnation of C++ so much as an inevitable consequence of being successful for a long time.

    To be clear, I’m not defending C++. Just pointing out that it’s not unusual in this regard. I have no doubt that Rust will also have vestigial warts in time, if it doesn’t already.

    • Superb@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
      91·
      8 months ago

      Why can’t it be both a condemnation of C++ AND an inevitable consequence of success? C++ was a success, but we’ve learned a lot and it’s time to move on

      • mox@lemmy.sdf.org
        113·
        8 months ago

        Condemning apples for having seeds doesn’t make a reasonable case for choosing other fruit, which also have seeds.

    • Corbin@programming.devEnglish
      7·
      8 months ago

      You are very close to a deep truth of language design: all large popular languages slowly die from committees overloading them with cruft and redundant features, and at the end of their healthspans, they become painful for all involved. In your list, this includes both PHP and ECMAScript; Perl 5 avoided this fate, but Raku certainly suffers from it.