601–610 of 668 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[dead]
People who believe in total unsuitability would be acting silly indeed. But most would agree that writing code on languages that provide better and safer tooling is a positive. Sure, the main Rust compiler currently depends on LLVM, which is currently written in C++. But the rustc team might choose to follow a similar path to Zig and replace LLVM, or LLVM might get rewritten in Rust. Finally, while most bugs are logi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[dead]
Quite frankly, this post is massive set of unsubstantiated claims. For starters, no one said the only problem with Chromium is C++. But it certainly contributes with some of the problems (specially those related to security). And, no, these bugs don't come from "noob programmers." They come from experienced engineers. Then you just mention that removed some "unnecessary and unwanted" code. According to what standard?…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
After doing a bit more research, this fact is somewhat less impressive. Apparently, this was also the first time in nearly 20 years that there was such a large capacity crunch and many researchers weren't able to get into the competition. One of the rejected researchers did apparently have a working exploit, which, upon not getting into the event, they responsibly disclosed, and it was then patched before the event.
This was, itself, driven by AI vuln finding, ironically :-P however, I took the example of @ggwhyp's Firefox RCE - quite a long chain, rejected by the organizers but probably would have won some cash from Mozilla... Details aren't public, so we won't know. Maybe their vuln was patched with Bug 2024918? At this point it's anyone's guess... But the fact that nobody else who made it through had an exploit and claimed $$…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The real curious thing is serious C/C++ folks seem like one of the least likely groups imaginable, to want to undergo humiliating and embarrassing blunders… Yet they seemingly don’t mind that it practically guarantees them to make blunders over and over again.
Pre-Rust "serious C++ folks" used it because it was the best option if you wanted essentially zero performance overhead no heavy runtime and GC spikes. They didn't like the lack of memory safety but it was seen as an unfortunate but necessary trade-off. These days most of the sensible people have moved from C++ to Rust and so the "serious C++ folks" are an entirely different distribution of people who are much more i…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Every single new working student we get, we have to teach every single thing again. Its a massive effort for our team it has to be a massive effort around the globe if you take quality series. It will just be easier better cheaper to teach ONE LLM how to do good code review
Yep! Then you’ll never need to train any students ever again. So…are you planning to hire only seniors who already know everything? Where do these seniors come from?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wrong. For starters, a good typing system absolutely helps catching logic errors at compile time.
[dead]
The sentiment of "if it compiles it probably works" for languages like Rust and Haskell is there for a good reason.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Basically all C programs I use, shells, editors, terminals, etc. But I do not claim that there "never has been a memory-related bug" but that it is not "riddled with" memory-related bugs, which I would expect would have manifested in at least one segfault over all these years, which I did not observe.
[flagged]
We speak of the horrors of C/C++ precisely because we've seen both sides (3 sides more specifically), and can compare.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can very easily spot performance issues through code. Allocations are often visible, slower hash maps are often visible, loops are visible, etc.
No you can't.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is just my hypothesis, but I suspect that at Chrome‘s engineering team there has been a culture of inaction for the past decade or more. That nothing gets done, no bugs fixed, unless some higher ups at Google sees a business interest in resolving it. And what has changed now is that the higher ups at Google do indeed see a business interest in fixing bugs and giving the credit to AI to sell us more AI.
Hard disagree. Google holds browser PWN contests and pay people for reporting bugs. If they can find the bugs themselves, they won't have to pay others. Also, there is a business interest, controlling the browser market helps their data collection and ad business. People could drop Chrome like they drop IE if Chrome does not perform - there are other browsers. "inaction for the past decade or more." I don't follow Ch…