Bjarne Stroustrup, creator of C++, has issued a call for the C++ community to defend the programming language, which has been shunned by cybersecurity agencies and technical experts in recent years for its memory safety shortcomings.

  • beleza pura@lemmy.eco.br
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    C++ [relies] on manual memory management

    not exactly. i can’t remember the last time i new’d or deleted anything at work. not only do we have smart pointers for over a decade now, but also, most of the time, you don’t even want to be allocating stuff on the heap anyway, so raii will take care of managing your resources. memory management in c++ is explicit, but it’s mostly automatic

    yeah it’s not as safe as rust, but idiomatic c++ isn’t supposed to be littered with new and delete statements. that’s indication of java-like c++ code, which has been the true villain in c++ codebases for decades, imo. most shitty c++ code is java-like c++ code written by people who would rather be coding in java (or java++ aka c#)

    • thebestaquaman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      Exactly… I’ve never gotten the whole “C++ is so unsafe” thing. If you’re having trouble with manual memory management in modern C++, it’s likely because you’re doing something wrong.

      There are use-cases for it, but if you’re working with something so performance critical that you can’t afford an std::array or unique_ptr, you’re probably better off just writing straight C instead (except then you don’t even have references).

      Modern C++ has a shitload of guardrails if you care to use them, but also lets you say “fuck it, this void* points to a double, trust me” if you want to.

  • FizzyOrange
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 days ago

    Yeah it’s too late. Maybe if they had taken this problem seriously 20 years ago…

  • Reptorian
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Just use Rust. Eazy Peazy. C++ will likely be still be used because it’s just not realistic for some softwares to switch to a safer programming language.

    • Croquette@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      Until chip manufacturers officially support rust, my clients will not want me to use an unofficial crate no matter how good it is.

    • DaPorkchop_@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      3 days ago

      I will use Rust when const generics are actually useful and we get some viable alternative to variadic templates.

    • ulterno
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      I feel like it’s just a matter of time.

      Since someone managed to make an event based library in Rust, I don’t think we need to stop at it.
      As long as some of the problems with the borrow checker with large code-bases can be fixed, it should be usable for pretty much every application.

      On the other hand, all we have done is changed the terms of “don’t make it crash” to a simpler, “don’t use unsafe”. That, I feel, would eventually bring up similar problems in different ways from what we have now.


      On the other, other hand, until my concentration becomes so bad that I am not able to handle my memory allocations, I will not stop using C++