Hacker News Reader

Comment by bun_terminator | Hacker News Reader

no you just have to write a githook with some static analysis, like literally everyone who does proper c++. Safety hasn't been an issue in c++ for more than a decade. It's just a made up thing by people who don't use the language but only want to hate.

View on HN

Go look at the CVEs and github issues of modern C++ codebases. Your statement is nonsense. Chromium is still plagued by use after free. How high do you set the bar? Which codebases are we allowed to look at?

I had that exact discussion with someone else a while ago. And when you actually go through the chromium memory bugs, it's 100% avoidable with an absolute baseline of competence and not using ancient bugs. It's unfair that C++ always has to compete in its state from 1990s against languages in their current iteration.

That's why I asked what the bar was? If Google is writing shitty C++ even with the world's eyes on their code base, who is doing it right? No one writing anything sufficiently complicated that's for sure.

However you feel about this issue: It's pretty widely known that google is bad at c++. Most codebases will be of significantly higher quality.

Google chrome must be one of the most used (in terms of CPU time) C++ software in the world right now. That means it's been fuzz tested (by the developers as well as by the users and also the random websites that gives it garbage html and javascript) extensively. I can only think of the Linux kernel that is more widely used, and Linux is not C++.

Since you seem to be very good at c++, can you point to a "significantly higher quality" c++ projects please? I'd like to see what it looks like.

> Since you seem to be very good at c++, can you point to a "significantly higher quality" c++ projects please?

Not the parent commenter, but there are quite a few very high-quality C++ projects out there.

- LLVM

- KDE projects

- CMake

- Node.js

- OpenJDK

I don't think popular or large correlate with code quality. In fact it's probably the opposite. It uses pretty ancient c++ stuff, which immediately disqualifies it from bring of high quality in regards to the cpp code (and also is the cause for their security bugs)

>It's pretty widely known that google is bad at c++

No, it's not. This is literally the first time I hear about this. Do you have any sources to support your claim, especially in light of the fact that Google has written and contributed to some of the largest and most important C++ codebases in existence?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com