So don't use STL
Indeed, No True Scotsman would use STL with C++.
clang-tidy and Cppcheck and flaw finder and Sonarqube
The last job I had where I had to use C/C++, we automatically ran an expensive static analysis tool every time we checked in code. I'd estimate that it only found about half of the potential segfaults, and it made up for that by finding twice as many false positives.
The "rules" of mutable collections in STL state that collections may not be mutated while being iterated.
Nope. If I had used st::list instead of std::vector, it would have been perfectly fine and officially supported. (Assuming I changed "i+10" to "i+11" in order to make the algorithm actually terminate, although that change wouldn't affect the vector crash.).
The problem is that there are dozens of different rules you have to remember to apply to the different types of lists and iterators. And that's only talking about that one topic. There are hundreds of other rules covering a multitude of language aspects that you have to mentally apply against every single line of code you write, many of which can potentially cause memory corruption.
Ish.
I would not trust C++ for safety-critical work as MISRA can only limit features, it can't add support for contracts.
There have been other dialects of C++ - Aspect-Oriented C++ and Feature-Oriented C++ being the two that I monitored closely. You can't really do either by using subsetting, regardless of mechanism.
IMHO, it might be easier to reverse the problem. Instead of having specific subsets for specific tasks, where you drill down to the subset you want, have specific subsets for specific mechanisms where you build up to the feature set you need.
You don't need the language to enforce memory safety to program memory-safe. The most important thing is, for example, to never touch raw pointers. C++ makes it very easy to avoid this. Rust forces you to avoid it, but just because C++ gives you the loaded gun, it doesn't mean you have to use it. In particular not on your own foot.
That is a dangerous misconception. You don't need to use any pointers to get memory errors in C++:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <vector>
int main() {
std::vector<int> v = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9};
for (auto i : v) {
if (i % 2 == 0) {
v.push_back(i + 10);
}
printf("%d\n", i);
}
return 0;
}
$ g++ -Wall -pedantic t.cpp
$ echo $?
0
$./a.out
1
2
-947527061
1600570778
5
6
7
8
9
languages like Rust exist to put ignorant programmers in straight jackets for their own good
Are you seriously trying to suggest that never allocating memory is not also a "straight jacket"?
You seem to be saying that a currently existing bowdlerized version C++ is safe for close-world problems. Possibly so, but that still leaves C++ unsuitable for open-world problems. That makes C++ only suitable for niche applications. Why learn it?
If you just use Rust or any other memory safe language, you won't have to worry about what kind of "world" you're writing for, or about choosing from a range of increasingly dangerous "profiles".
Oh, absolutely. These days, I spend so much time checking the output from computers, it would normally have been quicker to do searches by hand. This is... not useful.
I can fully understand that.
> What this will do, is that newly graduated STEM masters and PhD will go back to their home country and we lose out on top talents.
The vast majority of H1-Bs are not the top talents.
A restoration expert in Egypt has been arrested for stealing a 3,000 year old bracelet and selling it purely for the gold content, with the bracelet then melted down with other jewellery. Obviously, this sort of artefact CANNOT be replaced. Ever. And any and all scientific value it may have held has now been lost forever. It is almost certain that this is not the first such artefact destroyed.
For that you would want to focus on free energy and food replicators because once you have that, there's not much reason to work anymore.
No matter what, you're still going to need someone in a red shirt to duck into the circuit bays and reverse the polarity.
Yup. And I've got my USB (A) to DB9 serial adapter handy.
Which is unreliable in many situations. I worked on several projects that had issues involving intermittent data loss on a DB9 port, and every time the culprit turned out to be a USB/DB9 adapter. When we'd install dedicated RS232 cards, the problem went away.
For laptops, the answer to this kind of thing should be a standard space where a customer can specify what ports he wants... you get X number of standard ports, and then you can choose what goes into one or two available spaces. But you're just not going to see that happen with manufacturers, even if the customer is willing to pay a greater cost.
Someone didn't live through the loss of the floppy drive, DB9 ports, and parallel ports.
In my day, to plug in a mouse: We took the box apart, installed a proprietary bus card, and then tried to figure out non-conflicting spots for the I/O and IRQ jumpers. Then we typed a bunch of gibberish into AUTOEXEC.BAT. And we liked it!
It asks the question why don't kids play outside anymore and then in the next frame there's a picture of a pretty typical American city with absolutely no sidewalks let alone Parks or anything and the subtitle "the outside".
You give up a portion of your life in exchange for cars and a car centric civilization. And I guess for most people they think it's worth it.
Except that I spent some years growing up in dense, street-centric areas, and kids simply played in the streets. Every day. Our substitute for baseball (so as not to damage cars or windows) was "whiffle ball", with hollow plastic balls and bats. In the summers especially, we spent literally all day outside. In the streets. For kids who did this too much, the criticism was literally that "you let your kids run the streets".
Being car-centric has nothing to do with kids activity. The spread of video games and Internet connected culture had everything to do with the modern dearth of outdoor activity by kids. All of my youngest's friends are online in distant places. There are other kids in the neighborhood, but very few of them play outside that I can see. Online is where all the action is. Maybe the answer is for parents to literally kick kids out of the house, they way they used to do ("out, and I don't want to see you back inside until lunch" was a common summer refrain from parents). Maybe if all the kids are turned out, they'll start doing the natural thing, and make their own fun, which is all "outside" is.
Not at all. Free citizens picking lettuce on a corporate-owned ranch is the American Dream!
It's better than medieval serfdom was because you're FREE!!! You could even prove it by wearing a giant bald eagle and flag T-shirt while you work!!!
A whole bunch of opportunities have recently opened up to US citizens for picking lettuce.
1 Dog Pound = 16 oz. of Alpo
