Hacker News Reader

Simply by using C++, you tell the computer all sorts of things, such as "I know the entire language by heart", and "I have a death wish".

View on HN

While C++ is a dangerous tool indeed, ignoring the rule of 5 is analogous to ignoring the safety guidelines, not simply using the tool.

A C++ object can be perfectly safe to copy in one situation and conjure up nasal demons in another situation. I don't think rule of 5 would help in that case.

If the copy behaviour is that different between the two cases it should be two different classes.

I'm reminded of a quote about C, sadly I forget where it's from:

> It is fundamental tenet of C's philosophy that the programmer is always right, even when they are wrong.

Honestly I think that's what makes it (and C++) a great tool, despite the frustrations. I'd rather have a footgun than a nerf gun.

> I'd rather have a footgun than a nerf gun.

That's not really the choice we're faced with though. Ada and Rust are both far safer than C, and they're also plenty powerful.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com