this post was submitted on 10 Nov 2024
205 points (92.2% liked)

Programming

17489 readers
215 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Rules

  • Follow the programming.dev instance rules
  • Keep content related to programming in some way
  • If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
snowe@programming.dev
Ategon@programming.dev
MaungaHikoi@lemmy.nz
205
The US government wants devs to stop using C and C++ (www.theregister.com)
submitted 1 week ago by lemmee_in@lemm.ee to c/programming@programming.dev
91 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TheFogan@programming.dev 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Take Rust in Linux, for example. Even with support from Linux’s creator, Linus Torvalds, Rust is moving into Linux at a snail’s pace.

Because Linux is the biggest software in the entire world and they do lot of stuff their own way. Rust is integrated slowly for future new projects. It makes sense to move in snail pace. The government doesn’t suggest the Linux project to stop using C entirely. The government “recommends” to start new projects in memory safe languages, if it is a critical software. That makes sense to me.

Doubly so... Don't care what the language is, or what the advantages are... Even if there's a considerable security advantage to a new language... There's no such thing as a language that's advantages outweigh the security risks of rushed development to convert decades of tested code.

[–] thingsiplay@beehaw.org 1 points 1 week ago

There’s no such thing as a language that’s advantages outweigh the security risks of rushed development to convert decades of tested code.

Who said or suggested that anyway? Other than bringing this up now. Who says to convert decades of tested code to rushed code of new language?? Do people read the stuff before they reply?