Programmer Humor

19821 readers

828 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

Keep content in english
No advertisements
Posts must be related to programming or programmer topics

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

Feyter@programming.dev

anzo@programming.dev

BurningTurtle@programming.dev

pylapp@programming.dev

964

Evolution of C (programming.dev)

submitted 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) by JPDev@programming.dev to c/programmer_humor@programming.dev

91 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] ssm@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

If there was a simpler way to make C memory-safe, it would have been done decades ago.

We've had compile time sanitizers (-fsanitize=blah in gcc/clang) and runtime sanitizers (valgrind) for ages. I don't know how they stack up against rust's compile time sanitizers, but it's something.

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

About how an Excel spreadsheet with no formulas stacks up against a corporate accounting suite. Valgrind is how you find the bleeding once you inevitably introduce a memory bug. I don't understand all the fsanitize options, but I'm guessing they aren't a blanket solution, exactly because memory bugs have still been inevitable.

This thread is making me wonder how many people actually understand what Rust does. It rigorously prevents any form of memory error at all in normal code, and unsafe blocks, where needed, tend to be tiny. It makes C segmentation faults look just as goofy as JavaScript type errors.