It's just as "amazing" to read these takes from techno purists. You use software written in C++ daily, and it can be a pragmatic choice regardless of your sensibilities.
When any Costco sells a desktop ten thousand times faster than the one I started on, we can afford runtime sanity checks. We don’t have to keep living like this, with stacks that randomly explode.
You can die of multiple illnesses so there's no point in developing treatment for any particular one of them.
> I like core dumps because the failure is immediate, obvious, and fatal.
Core dumps provide a terrible debugging experience, as the failure root cause is often disjoint from the dump itself. Not to mention that core dumps are but one outcome of memory errors, with other funnier outcomes such as data corruption and exploitable vulnerabilities as likely.
Lastly, memory safe languages throw an exception or panic on out of bound access, which can be made as immediate and fatal as core dumps. And much more obvious to debug, since you can trust that the cause starts indeed at the point of failure
I think we've got the balance wrong, partly because some engineering considerations derive directly from separate compilation. ODR no diagnostic required doesn't have to be a thing any more.
https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/microsoft/new-windows-...
Someone else posted statistics that show Firefox being 10% Rust, but I'm not sure it makes sense to include HTML and Python and JavaScript in the comparison. If you compare Rust against C/C++, it's 20%
There is no such language as C/C++. I presume you mean the sum of C and C++, and that you omit external libraries from the tally.
"I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're refering to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX."
Isn't this a tad pedantic? You obviously understood what I was saying.
>and that you omit external libraries from the tally.
Mozilla vendors their dependencies. They're counted.