• 0 Posts
  • 148 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 21st, 2023

help-circle
  • I’m not going to say that C is unusable by any means (and I’m not saying you are saying that). It’s a perfectly usable language. I do think that more people would benefit from exploring other options though. Programming languages are tools, not sports teams. People should familiarize themselves with many tools so they always have a good tool to use for any job.

    I think a lot of people believe this because there is some truth to parts of it. I think we see languages like Rust and Zig (and others) popping up to try and solve specific problems better than others.

    As for OP’s post, there is no single “C successor” or anything like that. People will use the best tool they know of for the job whether that’s C, Rust, C++, Zig, Python, C#, etc. Many languages will “replace” C in some projects, and at the same time, C will replace other languages in some projects (likely to a lesser extent though).

    (Not /s this time)


  • Honestly C is the future. I don’t know why people would move from C to any other language. It does the job well enough that there’s no reason not to use it.

    Think about it. Every modern application depends on a piece of code written in C, not Rust or Zig or any other language (except assembly). It can be used to solve any problem, and works in more places than any other language.

    These arguments about “security” and “memory safety” are all pointless anyway in the face of modern code scanning tools. Cross-platform dev can be done trivially with preprocessors. If that’s not enough, I don’t know what to say. Get better at writing C obviously.

    Lifetimes and UB should all be kept in mind at all times. You can explicitly mark lifetimes in your C code if you want using comments. Any index-out-of-bounds bugs, use-after-free, etc are just signs that your team needs more training and better code scanning utils. Write more tests!

    Anything more complex than a simple typedef is just a sign that you’re over-engineering your solution. #include is both simple, and does exactly what you’d expect any reasonable language to do - paste your referenced code inline. It’s genius, and doesn’t require any complicated explanations on namespaces and classes and subclasses and so on.

    So which will be the future? C obviously.

    /s







  • I made the mistake of starting Frostpunk (1) since I saw that 2 released. It’s an incredibly well-made game. The art style is beautiful, the game is intense, there is a lot of emotion, and it does its one thing just so well. Unlike a lot of modern games these days, Frostpunk wants you to lose, which is fitting for its setting. It sees that you’re behind, then kicks you in the shins for good measure rather than lending a helping hand. I’ve lost so many hours of my time to this game in the past week.

    I’ve read that Frostpunk 2 is a completely different game. That one might be next on my list if I get to it before Factorio updates and the expansion for it comes out.


  • The “‘modern’ development stack” we used at my school when I was in a CS program was C++98 or something, compiled using gcc directly. This was in the last decade. It technically wasn’t C!

    But we did use C in my computer engineering classes so I guess they technically did teach it. I feel very fortunate that I haven’t needed to use it since then.




  • Pushing HTML even further, one could say it’s a declarative programming language that programs a UI in a mostly-stateless manner (inputs aren’t really stateless but you can argue the state is provided by the UI rather than managed by HTML).

    I’m not sure I’d make this leap myself though, I have a hard time classifying it (or any other markup language) as a PL. As far as I am aware, you can’t really program a state machine with pure HTML, though you can accept inputs and return outputs at least.






  • I think it’s good to document why things are done, but extracting things out into another function is just documenting what is being done with extra steps. This also comes with a number of problems:

    1. Not all languages are readable. Documenting what is being done is important in some C, or when working with some libraries that have confusing usage syntax.
    2. Not all people reading the code know the language or libraries well. Those people need guidance to understand what the code is trying to do. Function names can of course do this, but…
    3. Not all types can be named in all languages. Some languages have a concept of “opaque types”, which explicitly have no name. If parameter and return types must be specified in that language, working around that restriction may result in unnecessarily complicated code.
    4. Longer files (the result of having dozens of single-use functions) are less readable. Related logic is now detached into pointers that go all over the file all because of an allergic reaction to code comments, where a simple // or # would have made the code just as readable.
    5. Function names can be just as outdated as code comments. Both require upkeep. Speaking from personal experience, I’ve seen some truly misleading/incorrect function names.



  • While I agree, it makes connecting to localhost as easy as http://0:8080/ (for port 8080, but omit for port 80).

    I worry that changing this will cause more CVEs like the octal IP addresses incident.

    Edit: looks like it’s only being blocked for outgoing requests from websites, which seems like it’ll have a much more reasonable impact.

    Edit 2: skimming through these PRs, at least for WebKit, I don’t see tests for shorthand IPs like 0 (and no Apple device to test with). What are the chances they missed those…?