• lad
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    I think, the idea was along the lines of “because C++ was not memory-safe, and it has to stay compatible with how it was, there are still a lot of ways to not write memory-safely”

    This makes sense, there are memory-safely features available but there are a lot of programmers that will never willingly use that features, because the olden ways are surely better

    Other than that, I agree, when you’re paid to fix an unfixable problem you will probably claim something like that and advocate for your solution being the only one that solves this

    • 0x0
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      2 months ago

      there are a lot of programmers that will never willingly use that features, because the olden ways are surely better

      Found the rust shill.