Re:Safe C++ proposal is not being continued
by shawn_w on Saturday September 13, 2025 @11:33PM
(#45237198)
They could also care about safety but just not like the Rust approach.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Safe C++ proposal is not being continued
by AlotOfReading on Sunday September 14, 2025 @12:36AM
(#45237471)
This was asked at the aforementioned chat. Andreas Weis (MISRA) responded along the lines of "You shouldn't be writing new code in C++ if you want guarantees". Might not have the identity correct, my notes aren't in front of me.
Re:Safe C++ proposal is not being continued
by john_the_writer on Sunday September 14, 2025 @05:54AM
(#45238721)
Love this quote. An love the intent.
Re:Safe C++ proposal is not being continued
by motorest on Sunday September 14, 2025 @02:19PM
(#45242042)
> Love this quote. An love the intent.
What intent do you think it has? That proposals are still being worked on and haven't been published in a specification yet?
Re:Safe C++ proposal is not being continued
by motorest on Sunday September 14, 2025 @02:14PM
(#45242010)
> (...) "You shouldn't be writing new code in C++ if you want guarantees".
I'm afraid context is required to actually understand what was said. For example, it can mean anything including very obvious things like stating that the committee is still working on proposals to provide guarantees and they won't feature in a standard until the work is done and a new standard is published. Which would be stating the obvious.