Re: Re: US White House urges
By: calcmandan to Nightfox on Wed Apr 10 2024 11:05 am

https://shorturl.at/KMZ07

When the white house gives advisories like this, that's when you pause. What they should be doing is promoting good practice and education on how to avoid such issues. After all, mainstream applications and OS's are still written in those languages.

I was thinking that too. Though I imagine they (hopefully) talked to some software people to get some expert opinions about it. Also, I've seen other developrs say basically the same thing, that C and C++ are prone to bugs due to human error (buffer overruns, dynamic memory allocation without de-allocation, etc.) that can make the software prone to crashes and possibly exploits from malware - and they say some newer langauges have mechanisms to try to minimize or prevent these kinds of bugs and issues.

Nightfox

---
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: Re: US White House urges
By: calcmandan to Nightfox on Fri Apr 12 2024 03:47 am

It's not a new sentiment. People have been saying this for years. I like to stick with old standards that have stood the test of time. I can't count how many new languages have popped up the last decade... Almost none of them will be remembered. C++ is a very robust language, and the trade-off is complexity.

I like C++ too, but as someone who works in the industry, it seems like you can't stick to older things for too long. There are many teams who have moved to other languages in place of C++ and have been doing so for a long time. For desktop software on Windows, where C++ used to often be used, it seems to me that C# is often a preferred language now. Also, while not C++, the Linux kernel has historically been written in C, but recently I've heard they've been starting to code with Rust for the Linux kernel. I still see some software developer jobs with C++ and C, but not a whole lot these days.

Nightfox

---
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com