cmeerw@programming.dev to C++@programming.devEnglish · edit-23 months agoThe empire of C++ strikes back with Safe C++ blueprintwww.theregister.comexternal-linkmessage-square38fedilinkarrow-up137arrow-down12cross-posted to: programming@programming.devhackernews@lemmy.bestiver.setechnology@lemmit.online
arrow-up135arrow-down1external-linkThe empire of C++ strikes back with Safe C++ blueprintwww.theregister.comcmeerw@programming.dev to C++@programming.devEnglish · edit-23 months agomessage-square38fedilinkcross-posted to: programming@programming.devhackernews@lemmy.bestiver.setechnology@lemmit.online
minus-squareFizzyOrange@programming.devlinkfedilinkarrow-up2·3 months ago C++ is technically safe if you follow best practices Yeah but it’s virtually impossible to reliably follow best practices. The compiler won’t tell you when you’re invoking UB and there is a lot of potential UB in C++. So in practice it is not at all safe.
minus-squareFalconMiragelinkfedilinkarrow-up4·3 months agoI agree I was only adding my opinion (that people should try to always use the latest version of C++, which is inherently safer, but still not 100% safe)
Yeah but it’s virtually impossible to reliably follow best practices. The compiler won’t tell you when you’re invoking UB and there is a lot of potential UB in C++.
So in practice it is not at all safe.
I agree
I was only adding my opinion (that people should try to always use the latest version of C++, which is inherently safer, but still not 100% safe)