News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Why you should, actually, rewrite some of it in Rust. Parent comment

Re:Why you should, actually, rewrite some of it in Rust by sebcat on Wednesday July 12, 2017 @11:56AM (#14753582)
Or just rewrite it in modern C. This is sane and doable in a short period of time. You just have to make sure it's modern C.

(no true Scotsman)

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why you should, actually, rewrite some of it in Rust by camus2 on Wednesday July 12, 2017 @12:01PM (#14753637)
> Or just rewrite it in modern C. This is sane and doable in a short period of time.

What do you call modern C?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why you should, actually, rewrite some of it in Rust by knicholes on Wednesday July 12, 2017 @12:05PM (#14753676)
I think his comment was facetious. I think the clue is "no true scotsman," which is a type of fallacy. I think the point is that it's assumed to be better because of the use of "modern," and that it's only valuable if it's rewritten in something modern. Perhaps it's a joke about how old code is actually fine, and that people who get excited about the cutting-edge technology could chill a little bit. Maybe it's just a mockery of the previous arguments.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why you should, actually, rewrite some of it in Rust by adwhit on Wednesday July 12, 2017 @12:22PM (#14753838)
No true Scotsman:

"We found a terrifying vulnerability in your codebase. You should rewrite it in modern C++."

"OK, done!"

<Time passes>

"We found a terrifying vulnerability in your codebase. It must not have been modern C++!"

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why you should, actually, rewrite some of it in Rust by kreetx on Wednesday July 12, 2017 @12:12PM (#14753738)
Isn't Go pretty much the modern C, with additions in concurrency?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why you should, actually, rewrite some of it in Rust by treehau5 on Wednesday July 12, 2017 @12:21PM (#14753813)
No, not really. Go left a lot of C behind (pointer arithmetic for example), while also being garbage collected and having modules instead of header files. Coincidentally, while being touted as replacement for C and as the "language of the server", most of its converts come from python, ruby, and node.js evironments.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why you should, actually, rewrite some of it in Rust by trimbo on Wednesday July 12, 2017 @12:16PM (#14753775)
It's garbage collected. So, no.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why you should, actually, rewrite some of it in Rust by w8rbt on Wednesday July 12, 2017 @12:40PM (#14754017)
Perhaps he means C11? The most recent standard (ISO/IEC 9899:2011).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C11_(C_standard_revision)

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why you should, actually, rewrite some of it in Rust by hashmal on Wednesday July 12, 2017 @12:10PM (#14753719)
same question applies to C++. every new version of C++ is the modern version for a while…
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why you should, actually, rewrite some of it in Rust by sebcat on Wednesday July 12, 2017 @12:05PM (#14753671)
Well, anything that does not support the point I am making is not modern C.
[ Parent | on HN ]