Indeed, No True Scotsman would use STL with C++.

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.

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.

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

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.

No matter what, you're still going to need someone in a red shirt to duck into the circuit bays and reverse the polarity.

It used to be 26 episodes per season, with each episode airing twice during the year. It was a nice, simple way of filling the broadcast schedule. That shifted to 24 episodes at some point. There was a bigger shift, I think in the early 2000s, where they started having separate shows for the summer, and seasons started getting much shorter, sometimes more like 13 episodes. Now streaming services will put out 6-7 episode seasons; only a quarter of what a season used to be.

The good part of this is that you no longer get filler episodes. I remember watching shows like Stargate SG-1, and there were inevitably a few junk episodes, like a clip show that has some excuse to edit together a bunch of clips of previous episodes, or some episode that really didn't do much because they clearly spent all their budget already. I don't miss those. But with only 6 episodes, it's down to the same run-time as a miniseries, and things sometimes feel rushed.

For shows that are telling a story over the course of a season, the shorter episodes sometimes work well, but for more episodic shows (like Doctor Who), it just feels like you're getting shorted (because you are).

For many shows, the driving force is the quality of the writing and acting. Would the studios do better to spend less on the production and get more episodes for the same money? Good stories outweigh good effects.

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!

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.

Rides to and from airports are regulated, and there's a lot of money involved. That means the existing players are lobbying hard to keep the new competition out. If this is like everything else in history, they'll succeed only in delaying it. That delay will make the finances that much harder for new players, which may result in some failing, but eventually they'll get in. Considering that Tesla and Waymo have significant resources, they'll probably be the ones to break in to airport rides first. (Tesla just started trying to get the permits in California.)

At least Nixon had the class not to force his minions to take all of the credit for the Apollo missions in their press releases.

That's what Trump did here: Same as usual he took all of the credit for other peoples' work.

You wonder why he gets under peoples' skin? It's because essentially everything he does is some kind of asshole move like this.