←back to thread

218 points signa11 | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
lou1306 ◴[] No.43681059[source]
> Using a stricter language helps with reducing some classes of bugs, at the cost of reduced flexibility in expressing a solution and increased effort creating the software.

First of all, those languages do not "help" "reducing" some classes of bugs. They often entirely remove them.

Then, even assuming that any safe language with unsafe regions (Rust, C#, etc) would not give you comparable flexibility at a fraction of the risk... if your flexible, effortless solution contains entire classes of bugs, then there is no point in comparing "effort". You should at least take into account the effort in providing a software with a high confidence that those bugs are not there.

replies(3): >>43681118 #>>43681160 #>>43684056 #
immibis ◴[] No.43681118[source]
If the language has unsafe regions, it doesn't entirely remove classes of bugs, since they can still occur in unsafe regions.

(Predictable response: "But they can only occur in unsafe regions which you can grep for" and my response to that: "so?")

replies(4): >>43681325 #>>43681630 #>>43682375 #>>43682796 #
guappa ◴[] No.43681325[source]
Usually they can also happen outside, if you did something wrong in the unsafe region.

edit: I'm sorry that my captain obvious moment is turning out to be some truth bomb for some. Please keep downvoting as a way to regain your inner peace.

replies(1): >>43681442 #
1. Hackbraten ◴[] No.43681442[source]
> if you did something wrong in the unsafe region.

*you or anyone else in your chain of dependencies that use unsafe