221–222 of 222 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can go down the route to say C++ is largely a superset of C. You can always write C++ in the C way, so you don't see simplicity is an advantage of C.
> You can always write C++ in the C way Nope. They have grown too far apart. My C11 codebase simply does not compile when `mv *.c *.cpp && g++ main.cpp`.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> C is far more error prone than C++ I don't know about that... C++ (both the language and the library) is orders of magnitude more complex, and the opportunities to make mistakes have grown almost proportionally. (Two characteristic examples recently discussed here on HN: auto references and iterator invalidation.)
But C lacks even strings, lots of C bugs and vulnerabilities are related to memory management, memory ownership and string handling. Even the C subset of C++ is better than C since it at least has more explicit type conversions that forces the developer to state his or her intent. One example of the C string problem is the strcpy(buffer, char* string) that copies a string to a buffer. If an external actor discovers h…
It is pity there is no alternative "standard library" with safer data struct and operations.
There are some attempts, for example, relatively wildly known klib: https://github.com/attractivechaos/klib