Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

It's time to halt starting any new projects in C/C++

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 929 posts

Re: It's time to halt starting any new projects in C/C++

#331

Post by snovv_crash »

josephg wrote: post #214
bitL wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dunno. Young devs can pick basic Rust constructs fast but when it comes to complicated stuff where performance is critical... There must be raw talent and lot of grind. IMO it's easier to write super complex stuff in C++ than in Rust as there are just too many cognitive things to keep in mind in Rust to even compile. C++ for talented folks makes life easier there. Like JavaScript, yet another language written for bad…

> in Rust as there are just too many cognitive things to keep in mind in Rust to even compile. That hasn’t been my experience. Rust (the language) doesn’t seem to get any more complex as programs get bigger. Lifetimes, while complex in isolation, tend to compose really well. Most of the pain of learning rust seems to be experienced up front. (Well, other than async but I don’t consider that ready yet). In comparison,…

If you didn't use C++ with the RAII paradigm, and had to write your own new/delete, your previous C++ experience isn't representative of the complexity of dealing with C++ since C++11. The new standards are a massive upgrade, and now a lot of other things are starting to get major quality of life improvements too (eg. template metaprogramming)

Re: It's time to halt starting any new projects in C/C++

#332

Post by kramerger »

virgulino wrote: post #251

You could say that Mark Russinovich is a hacker's hacker, the foremost Windows hacker, and a reverse engineering wizard. It was he who discovered and blew the whistle on the Sony rootkit scandal, for example, after finding and reverse engineering it on his machine. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootk... He extensively reverse engineered and documented "Windows Internals" details before joinin…

Well... He is also written some horrible fiction novels, so the guys is not perfect.

Re: It's time to halt starting any new projects in C/C++

#333

Post by LAC-Tech »

TakeBlaster16 wrote: post #51
LAC-Tech wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not. But to be fair it feels more ready than rust did at 1.0

Not to say I'm not excited for Zig, but there are still bugs, miscompilations, and many breaking changes planned. Communicate realistic expectations, lest you become the next language evangelism strike force.

I'm not really over-stating zigs readiness. More pointing out how ready rust wasn't at 1.0.

Re: It's time to halt starting any new projects in C/C++

#334

Post by fsloth »

jandrewrogers wrote: post #306
hgs3 wrote: post #211

I tried Rust about five years ago and I had trouble expressing cyclic data structures because there is no clear "owner" in a cyclic data structure. The "safe" solution recommended by the rustaceans was to use integers as references to the data in a vec or hashmap. I was rather put off by this: Instead of juggling pointers I was juggling integers. It made the code harder to debug and find logic errors. At least when I…

In fairness, using integer handles instead of pointers is pretty idiomatic in high-performance C++ too. I've never found it to be onerous or complicated.

Yes, using integers is not a handicap in many cases but default way of addressing.

Re: It's time to halt starting any new projects in C/C++

#335

Post by ghoward »

drivebycomment wrote: post #319
ghoward wrote: post #135

Unless he means that Rust should be used on projects where the Rust compiler is available for all relevant platforms and C and C++ can be used otherwise, I disagree. In fact, until LLVM is replaced, C++ will probably be the language of choice for new languages. Even `rustc` requires a C++ bootstrap for that purpose. There are also other important C++ and C libraries that will continue to mean C and C++ may be better…

> In other words, it's possible to put C and C++ on the same footing as Rust when it comes to memory bugs; No. This is only true if you don't care about occasional bugs. e.g. hobby projects. But if you're talking about mission-critical or security-critical software, there is a gap - or a canyon - between C vs C++ vs Rust. And no amount of extra "efforts" by the programmer's part can bridge those gaps completely.

The true test of what I said is "show me the code."

The code is my `bc`. [1]

Find a memory bug, any memory bug, in my `bc` after 1.0.

Rust has occasional memory bugs too; I mentioned that specifically. It still happens.

So if you really are correct, break my `bc`.

[1]: https://git.yzena.com/gavin/bc

Re: It's time to halt starting any new projects in C/C++

#336

Post by ghoward »

imron wrote: post #323
ghoward wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dereferencing NULL pointers: my code is structured such that every function parameter that can be NULL is marked so. And I check those possibly-NULL pointers. This could also be done with a macro: #define y_d(p) ((p) == NULL ? abort(), *p : *p) Otherwise, the compiler (clang, usually) warns me when a NULL pointer is passed in and I have asserts to catch them. Even before I had all of this infrastructure, deferencing…

After looking at this, honestly, you should just use C++.

Well, you're not wrong, but I hate C++. With a passion.

Re: It's time to halt starting any new projects in C/C++

#337

Post by 29athrowaway »

ephimetheus wrote: post #295
diego_moita wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because, little by little, C++ became "unlearnable". Long ago C++ made C a little bit more complex. Because there were already lots of C programmers that wasn't a big deal. But then it didn't stop. Little by little C++ grew into a monstrosity. A lot of people went along. I gave up. For new programmers to climb in 2-3 years a mountain that seasoned programmers took 15-20 years to climb is asking too much.

In what world is C++ harder to learn than Rust?

There is C++ code that 99.999% of people that list C++ in their resume are unable to explain.

You can get comfortable with some idioms of C++, that's fine. Can you understand what any valid C++ code means? No. Such person does not exist, not even Bjarne.

Re: It's time to halt starting any new projects in C/C++

#338

Post by juiiiced »

rufius wrote: post #297
ephimetheus wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In what world is C++ harder to learn than Rust?

This world - the one you exist in right now. I say that as someone that wrote C++ for 10 years before moving to Rust. Rust was by far easier. That said - that’s an extremely biased statement and I recognize that. I think it was largely the compiler that helped make it easier.

I think have 10 more years of programming experience probably makes it easier to pick up a new language

Re: It's time to halt starting any new projects in C/C++

#339

Post by snovv_crash »

lmm wrote: post #285
lenkite wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't need to know about about 6 different string types, arcane borrow checker workarounds, RefCell complexity, massive async cruft - acquired by Rust in just 2 years. C++ will still be used heavily when Rust is buried 6 feet under and HN moves to the next hype language.

> You don't need to know about about 6 different string types If you're working on a substantial C++ codebase you probably do, actually.

There are no 20 year old Rust codebase to compare with. C++ has gotten easier and cleaner on the last 20 years, whereas Rust has gotten more complicated. If we want to plot future trajectories...

Re: It's time to halt starting any new projects in C/C++

#340

Post by unrealhoang »

mmis1000 wrote: post #208
synergy20 wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Oh, and it's possible to make C as good as Rust", do you have some concrete advice documented somewhere? Thanks!

Probably write it in Rust first and make a direct C port based on it? (Or is there a tool do this automatically already?)

Yes, mrustc is a compiler that compile Rust into C code.
Post reply on HN