Hacker News Reader

Yes, Rust is younger. There is less code out there running to root out undefined behavior.

Except Rust allows for less undefined behavior. I wouldn't be surprised if it improved at a faster rate then C. Or C++ ()

() Please don't say C/C++. They are different beasts.

View on HN

Addendum to your nitpick: Also don't even leave it at just "C++" unless you really are a master of everything in C++98 plus all the new stuff in C++14.

Even the name tells you that C++ was originally designed to be C with extra features. It can still be used that way and frequently is. These days, there are contexts in which the differences are very significant, and there are many others where any statement about either applies to both, and in those latter contexts "C/C++" is completely valid.

And C++ was originally just a C pre-processor. It's not anymore. So what it was originally is not that relevant nowadays. And that's the whole point. They have diverged too much.

These contexts you speak of are rare enough that the "no-C/C++" heuristic is useful.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com