Maybe "rewrite it in Rust" is annoying, but from my point of view "Rust doesn't prevent every bug ever, so you should just use C or C++" is much more annoying.
-
-
That's why I run my C code through static analyzers, ASAN, UBSAN and TSAN ;) But that's not the point, I agree that C is "too loose" and would love more compile-time memory safety options. It's just that Rust has too many things I know I will never need nor use... [1/...]...
-
...and in that regard it is like C++ (and unlike C): a few solid ideas at the core, but quite some non-essential optional "fluff" on top (like traits, async, functional-style features), that's what I mean with "too big surface area". I'd like a "fixed C", not a "fixed C++" :)
- Još 6 drugih odgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
If changing programming language improves the stability of your program, you're QA process suck. Also, there's high chance that you're over-complicating things. C helped me to don't even think about writing complicated, or "clever" things, thus improved my productivity by a ton.
-
Using Rust or some super-fancy C++ subset with super safe ptrs will usually just transform your stability issues into (debug) performance ones
That will again, hit your QA efficency on the long run. (assuming you make debug builds, and use automated tests and tdd)
Kraj razgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
A team of one?
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.