News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on The descent to C. Parent comment

Re:The descent to C by userbinator on Tuesday January 28, 2014 @07:29AM (#7136662)
In some cases, we want freedom... and that's something that has been neglected a bit too much with new programming languages IMHO. Safety/security feels like it's the latest of the dumbing-down "let's treat programmers like idiots" fad.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The descent to C by scott_s on Tuesday January 28, 2014 @10:08AM (#7137434)
I think the approach of languages like Rust, which enforce strict safety by default, but allow "unsafe" regions of code, is the correct way to go.

See http://static.rust-lang.org/doc/master/rust.html#unsafety

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The descent to C by Allan_Smithee on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @02:14AM (#7142466)
Or if you have any sense of history, languages like Modula-2/2+/3. (And undoubtedly a few (dozen?) others I'm unaware of.)

Nothing new in software development. All the "new" shinies are decades (!) old.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The descent to C by pjmlp on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @02:30AM (#7142508)
Somehow young developers seem to think only C and C++ offer native features.

I wonder how we got sidetracked like that.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The descent to C by Allan_Smithee on Tuesday January 28, 2014 @09:51AM (#7137331)
I submit as evidence 99.44% of software that has been released that programmers are, in fact, idiots.
[ Parent | on HN ]