Rust lobbyists winning

  • toys_are_back_in_town [comrade/them, she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    19 days ago

    I interpreted your comment as being dismissive of understanding basic memory safety because no jobs care about this.

    I thought it ridiculous that people don’t care that their programs explode. I guess it changes your mindset when your service going down isn’t a matter of costing the company money, but affecting real people.

    But maybe you weren’t being sarcastic?

    • neo [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      19 days ago

      I was being serious. I offhandedly expressed some excitement, in a comment I forgot I even wrote, about interviewing at a place that writes modern c++. Which, if you don’t know, c++11 and especially beyond has features to manage lifetimes, ownership, memory, and other important things just as Rust does (but it’s still C++, so of course it has all the baggage C++ must carry and a compiler that doesn’t enforce any of this).

      But you rushed at the opportunity to be a complete ass about it and insult me for no reason. Presumably you also dismissively assumed I’ve never written Rust. Or that in 2024 the Rust jobs are so overflowing that I can just take my pick at one at my own leisure. As if my first preference is to write software in a language that still requires forward declarations.

      Yeah. You had such a good point, though. I really would rather not have an income in favor of writing perfectly memory safe software that nobody uses. Surely you have advice on that?