As a system programming language, C still deserves learning today

Re:As a system programming language, C still deserves learni... by pjmlp on Monday July 01, 2019 @05:36AM (#20323758)

Twenty years ago I was also mostly a C++ dev and unless the code was 100% written by me I would never issue such statement, given the total lack of control what others in the team or binary 3rd party libraries are doing.

I still use C++ as one of my favourite hobby languages and althought it has improved a lot, using C++20 best practice across a team (lets assume it is already available), with binary dependencies, is still a challange to make it 100% memory safe.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:As a system programming language, C still deserves learni... by kazinator on Monday July 01, 2019 @11:04AM (#20325980)

> unless the code was 100% written by me I would never issue such statement

It was 100% written by me.

Note that the Rust devs made an entire 100% written-by-them-language to make the same claims.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:As a system programming language, C still deserves learni... by pjmlp on Monday July 01, 2019 @12:09PM (#20326776)

It is a bit different though.

In C++ static analysis is optional, while it is part of language in Rust.

Then there is the whole language culture.

While me coming from stronger system languages, always strived for bounds checking enabled on my own C++ projects, good luck selling that to most C++ teams, even though in 99% of the use cases its impact is negligible.

Finally going all the way back to NEWP, system languages that require explicit unsafe blocks are much easier to do code review, than those where every line of code can possibly trigger unsafe behaviour, and C++ inherited lot of such cases from C.

[ Parent | on HN ]