Stop comparing programming languages

  • Python is versatile
  • JavaScript is powerful
  • Ruby is elegant
  • C is essential
  • C++
  • Java is robust
  • luciole@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    13 days ago
    • C++ is fine
    • Python is fine
    • C# is fine
    • PHP is fine
    • JavaScript is fine
    • C is fine
    • Java is fine

    I could go on

      • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        13 days ago

        JavaScript is also not fine.

        C++ apparently has a lot of footguns if you use too many parts of it. C and orthodox C++ are fine.

        • polonius-rex@kbin.run
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          13 days ago

          people say this but C is significantly more batshit than javascript

          oh you used scanf? one of the basic functions of our language? sorry that’s got a buffer overflow vulnerability so now your application is compromised

          • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            13 days ago

            Yeah, but as far as I understand that’s not a C vulnerability. It wasn’t added. C just exposes how the underlying CPU works.

            If you could avoid exposing dangerous memory quirks but still retain the same power… well, you’d have invented Rust. Rust is a better language than C, I agree with that.

            Edit: Yep, just double checked. Buffers live in physical memory and have to be finite, so if you advance outside of them you’ll go somewhere else. Scanf’s not special, this is just another inherent pointer issue.

            • polonius-rex@kbin.run
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              9
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              13 days ago

              exposing the machinations of the underlying CPU with no regard for safety is like, the definition of a footgun

              • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                edit-2
                13 days ago

                Okay, but how do you code on a CPU without directly interfacing the CPU at some point? Python and JavaScript both rely on things written in mid-level languages. There’s a difference between a bad tool and one that just has limitations inherent to the technology.

                Like, to echo the meme a bit, it’s not a totally straight comparison. They have different roles.

                • polonius-rex@kbin.run
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  13 days ago

                  a footgun isn’t inherently bad, it just implies a significant amount of risk

                  yes, if you need the ability to code on a low level, maybe C is necessary, but the times where that is actually necessary is smol

                  also rust

                  • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    13 days ago

                    Yes, also Rust. It wasn’t an option until recently though.

                    The times when C or C++ is worth it definitely isn’t always, but I’m not sure I’d class much of OS programming and all embedded and high-performance computing as small. If you have actual hard data about how big those applications are relative to others, I’d be interested.

                    Also, it’s a nitpick, but I’d personally say a footgun has to be unforeseeable, like literal shoe guns being added to a video game where guns were previously always visible. Once you understand pointers C is reasonably consistent, just hard and human-error-prone. The quirks follow from the general concepts the language is built on.

            • xigoi@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              13 days ago

              What’s the point of having a function in the standard library if the universal recommendation is to never use it?

              • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                11 days ago

                Is that the recommendation? This is the first time I’ve actually seen it discussed.

                I’m wondering at this point if a new, different stdlib would be better. Or just use Rust.

                • xigoi@lemmy.sdf.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  11 days ago

                  To be honest, my comment probably applies more to gets, but the point is the same.