@[email protected] to [email protected]English • edit-22 months agoThe empire of C++ strikes back with Safe C++ blueprintwww.theregister.comexternal-linkmessage-square38fedilinkarrow-up137arrow-down12cross-posted to: [email protected][email protected]
arrow-up135arrow-down1external-linkThe empire of C++ strikes back with Safe C++ blueprintwww.theregister.com@[email protected] to [email protected]English • edit-22 months agomessage-square38fedilinkcross-posted to: [email protected][email protected]
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilink6•2 months agoIt’s not moot. The Safe C++ is opt-in to safety. It has to be because otherwise it wouldn’t be compatible with existing C++.
minus-squareDark ArclinkfedilinkEnglish-3•edit-22 months agoThat’s a laudable difference /s. Using Rust is also an “opt-in” option.
It’s not moot. The Safe C++ is opt-in to safety. It has to be because otherwise it wouldn’t be compatible with existing C++.
That’s a laudable difference /s. Using Rust is also an “opt-in” option.