• ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    It’s not “the segmentation fault thing”. It’s that C allows you to shoot yourself in the foot in many various ways, part of which will immediately show itself in the form of a segfault, part of which may show urself in the form of a segfault minutes, days, or years later depending on how the users use the software, and part of which will not show itself in the form of a segfault ever but make the program unstable in other ways.

    Yeah, sure, you can say that it’s “a skill issue”, but maybe that’s not the attitude of the year if you want more contributors in the project, which is a useful goal if you don’t want it’s developer community to die out or otherwise disintegrate.

    where people indirectly include 6,000 crates and

    That’s why the maintainers shouldn’t allow anyone to just add any new dependencies without a proper consideration. I don’t think this is an unsolvable problem.

    • radiant_bloom@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      I admit to not knowing how running an open source project goes, but wanting more contributors seems like the wrong metric compared to better contributors.

      I understand the pitfalls of C are not limited to segmentation faults, but I suspect it would be more productive to fix C by including some of Rust’s better ideas than to throw it away, as seems to be the current trend.

      I don’t think Rust is wholly bad, to be clear, but it seems over-engineered to me, and the fact its useful new features don’t even completely work (see rust-cve) isn’t very encouraging.

      I would recommend listening to Jonathan Blow’s opinion on Rust, which I tend to agree with. I personally think I’m just going to stick with C until Rust either becomes the standard, or I retire and let the next generation worry about that.