←back to thread

In Defense of C++

(dayvster.com)
185 points todsacerdoti | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.199s | source
Show context
kronicum2025 ◴[] No.45268740[source]
The safety part in this article is incorrect. There's a google doc somewhere where Google did an internal experiment and determined that safety c annot be achieved in C++ without an owning reference (essentially what Rust has).
replies(1): >>45274115 #
Attrecomet ◴[] No.45274115[source]
Am I missing anything in the article about this problem in particular? Owning references are a part of modern C++, which should be covered by the author's arguments.
replies(3): >>45276325 #>>45277006 #>>45348935 #
1. kronicum2025 ◴[] No.45348935[source]
I meant to say exclusively owned references.