• lysdexic@programming.devOPM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    That’s awfully reductive.

    It really isn’t. Otherwise there would be programming languages out there that would make it impossible to write buggy code, and there is nothing of the sort.

    Tools can absolutely vary in their qualities and in their risks / benefits.

    You still get bugs. This isn’t up for discussion. In fact, the only difference is that somehow you assert that C++ suffers from this issue but started to backpedal when any language other than C++ is brought into the picture. That hardly sounds like a personal assertion that’s grounded and well founded.

    • 5C5C5C@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      What exactly have I backpedaled on in any of my replies?

      Rust.

      Rust eliminates entire categories of bugs at compile time with performance that is on par with C++ and often better.

      I do get bugs in my Rust code, but do you want to know what they are? Once in a while I forget to type a ! in an if-statement. Or I accidentally type && when I meant to type ||. These mistakes are trivially caught in unit tests or with a single run of the application and easily fixed. It’s also very rare for me to actually make these mistakes. Almost every single time I compile my Rust code, everything works on the first try. But I confess, once in a while one of these minor bugs slips in there.

      So yes bugs are possible in every language. But there’s a lot to be said about what kinds of bugs are possible, what the risks of those bugs are, and what the process of mitigating them is like. A memory corruption bug is an entirely different beast from a simple Boolean logic bug.