Also we’ve both tweeted this before but most compiler crashes are not memory safety violations but broken invariants... a more expressive language would certainly help but not in the way most people think when they hear we use C++
-
-
The main thing I push back against is the idea that anyone can write safe C++ at scale. If you know you’re writing code that will go wrong re. memory safety on some input and you are intentionally OK with that, I can’t really argue with it.
-
Aside: I see this sometimes from experienced game developers. Less experienced game devs say that they can write safe modern C++, which is obviously bogus. More experienced ones often say they know with C++ they’ll be shipping bugs, but its advantages outweigh the cost of bugs.
- 18 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Oh yeah I didn't mean to imply Swift is magical memory-safe C++. More that nobody's hunting for exploits, so the only ones that surface are due to permutations of trusted input, that trip asserts more frequently. Same as it was in the early/innocent days of C network servers.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.