mox to Programming@programming.dev • 23 hours agoThe empire of C++ strikes back with Safe C++ proposalwww.theregister.comexternal-linkmessage-square43arrow-up1163arrow-down11cross-posted to: hackernews@lemmy.bestiver.secpp@programming.dev
arrow-up1162arrow-down1external-linkThe empire of C++ strikes back with Safe C++ proposalwww.theregister.commox to Programming@programming.dev • 23 hours agomessage-square43cross-posted to: hackernews@lemmy.bestiver.secpp@programming.dev
minus-square@LANIK2000@lemmy.worldlinkfedilink0•6 hours agoThere’s been plenty of interop options between C++ and just about anything for decades. If languages like D, that made it piss easy, weren’t gonna change people’s minds, nothing can. Ditching C++ is the only way forward.
minus-square@FizzyOrange@programming.devlinkfedilink1•4 hours agoInterop between Rust and C++ is pretty bad actually - I can understand wanting to avoid that. However I still agree. I can’t see opt-in mechanisms like this moving the needle.
There’s been plenty of interop options between C++ and just about anything for decades. If languages like D, that made it piss easy, weren’t gonna change people’s minds, nothing can. Ditching C++ is the only way forward.
Interop between Rust and C++ is pretty bad actually - I can understand wanting to avoid that.
However I still agree. I can’t see opt-in mechanisms like this moving the needle.