Hacker News Reader

Comment by pshirshov | Hacker News Reader

That's cool. Though that's C/C++ again, unmanaged memory can't be considered safe in 2021. We need different things.

This type of comment is getting so old I wonder what can be done about it. Maybe the reason why we don't have "different things" is because users of these so called safe languages are too busy arguing online about how safe their programs are instead of actually writing anything worthwhile. Meanwhile operating systems will continue to be written primarily in C/C++ for the forseeable future

In case you check what I'm doing with my safe language you may be surprised. That's something new and worthwhile. Not an OS unfortunately, I would be happy to work on that but I can't live from that.

> Meanwhile operating systems will continue to be written primarily in C/C++ for the forseeable future

And we will continue reading about lifes ruined by bugs and people killed by exploits. There is no sustainable future with unsafe foundation.

> And we will continue reading about lifes ruined by bugs and people killed by exploits. There is no sustainable future with unsafe foundation.

Really? people die because of c++? it’s pretty hard to take the rust crew seriously if this is the point of view.

They do. At least some zero-days were used by some state actors to track, detain and kill people.

Also I don't like Rust.

I’d like to see some links showing remote exploits. Rust doesn’t protect against anything if the attacker has local access.

Rust is an ugly language that is not fun to use. There is one OS written in it (Redox) and it's progress is very slow. It's actually less work to audit C++ code manually to find memory unsafety than it is to use Rust and get that safety "for free". Sorry to say these things out loud.

> Rust is an ugly language that is not fun to use. There is one OS written in it (Redox) and it's progress is very slow

Yes, you are right. We need to invest lot more resources into that. And we need languages better than Rust.

> It's actually less work to audit C++ code manually to find memory unsafety

Nope, you are fundamentally wrong. And every new zeroday shows that you are wrong.

Zero-days only show that someone wasn't willing to put in the effort to audit the C++ code. If they won't do that, how will they put in the effort to write it in Rust?

Nope, you are fundamentally wrong. There are enough papers on this subject, just read it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com