this post was submitted on 28 Dec 2025
266 points (94.6% liked)

Programmer Humor

28058 readers
1022 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Post:

If you’re still shipping load‑bearing code in C, C++, Python, or vanilla JavaScript in 2025, you’re gambling with house money and calling it “experience.”

As systems scale, untyped or foot‑gun‑heavy languages don’t just get harder to work with—they hit a complexity cliff. Every new feature is another chance for a runtime type error or a memory bug to land in prod. Now layer LLM‑generated glue code on top of that. More code, more surface area, less anyone truly understands. In that world, “we’ll catch it in tests” is wishful thinking, not a strategy.

We don’t live in 1998 anymore. We have languages that:

  • Make whole classes of bugs unrepresentable (Rust, TypeScript)
  • Give you memory safety and concurrency sanity by default (Rust, Go)
  • Provide static structure that both humans and LLMs can lean on as guardrails, not red tape

At this point, choosing C/C++ for safety‑critical paths, or dynamic languages for the core of a large system, isn’t just “old school.” It’s negligence with better marketing.

Use Rust, Go, or TypeScript for anything that actually matters. Use Python/JS at the edges, for scripts and prototypes.

For production, load‑bearing paths in 2025 and beyond, anything else is you saying, out loud:

“I’m okay with avoidable runtime failures and undefined behavior in my critical systems.”

Are you?

Comment:

Nonsense. If your code has reached the point of unmaintainable complexity, then blame the author, not the language.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] qaz@lemmy.world 1 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (1 children)

I really like how I can turn everything into immutable val's and represent different paths as expressions, it can IMO really reduce the complexity of a function and makes it easier to spot bugs. I've been migrating some code of a FOSS app to Kotlin and was able to shrink most classes by like 30% while making it easier to read. The only thing I dislike about it is the additional syntax for various things, I could do without having multiple ways to write a constructor.

[–] glorkon@lemmy.world 2 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

Yes, there are things about Kotlin I don't love either. But I still like how it was clearly developed having developer quality-of-life in mind.