this post was submitted on 28 Feb 2024
215 points (95.7% liked)

Technology

70461 readers
3565 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

White House urges developers to dump C and C++::Biden administration calls for developers to embrace memory-safe programing languages and move away from those that cause buffer overflows and other memory access vulnerabilities.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] OutrageousUmpire@lemmy.world 69 points 1 year ago (5 children)

I’m not sure what to think about this. It’s bizarre, the White House making any recommendations on programming languages.

They’re definitely not seen as an authority in this field. Why would anyone care what recommendation they make? And so why make one at all?

[–] mox@lemmy.sdf.org 57 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They’re definitely not seen as an authority in this field. Why would anyone care what recommendation they make?

It's possible that they are acting on the advice of advisors who are authorities in this field.

And so why make one at all?

I expect it's because information and industrial security are components of national security, which is of great concern to them, and those things depend on software.

I'm not surprised to see this, given that state-sponsored electronic attacks are on the rise these days.

[–] EatATaco@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This is exactly why people sound sophomoric when they say "lobbying needs to go!" There are some drastic problems with lobbying as it is allowed now, but the last thing we need is the government regulating things they know nothing about without the input of experts. On top of that, it's nonsense that I can't pass my local councilman on the street and stop and push them to spend more time addressing important issues like climate change.

[–] mox@lemmy.sdf.org 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's important to remember that the argument against lobbying isn't about the broadest sense of the word "lobbying", but rather about corporations and other moneyed interests having unfair and unhealthy influence over the laws that govern everyone else.

The people who decry lobbying probably agree with you; they're just using the word in an implicitly narrow context.

[–] EatATaco@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

they’re just using the word in an implicitly narrow context.

I think we mostly agree, but disagree on this point. I think it's just that most people haven't given it any thought. Like they are just ignorantly going along with the popular opinion.

[–] mox@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 year ago

I suppose mob mentality is likely to play some part in every widely shared view.

At the very least, I can guarantee that one of said people has given it thought. :)

[–] porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't think your argument quite holds up. The directionality is important. It's true that the government can't always know about technical things directly, but I think it's fine for the government to be expected to know which experts they need to consult, and for that process not to just be open to everyone (which just means more open to those with more money).

[–] EatATaco@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

it’s fine for the government to be expected to know which experts they need to consult

What happens if they don't even know it's a problem? Or they don't realize the severity of the problem so it gets a lower priority?

And it also sounds like you're arguing that I can't talk to my local representative about what I think are the important issues that need to be addressed. If they have to seek me out, I would have zero input.

[–] phoneymouse@lemmy.world 27 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It’s a national security threat

[–] parens@programming.dev 12 points 1 year ago

C/C++ is a threat to mental stability

[–] phillaholic@lemm.ee 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

NIST are the experts guiding the White House.

[–] Sweetpeaches69@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

NIST is mentioned

confused and angry screaming

[–] someacnt_@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

There have been words around this, like how software should be safe by design, but the regulation should come from the governing entity. This is simply materialized now, but there has been momentum.

[–] Mango@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

They can't even figure out language for human interpretation much less computer interpretation.

[–] JoMomma@lemm.ee 56 points 1 year ago

Gov is getting rusty

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.zip 53 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I agree, let's start with dumping Windows.

[–] foobaz@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Done, next the Linux kernel? 😱

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.zip 6 points 1 year ago

It's a hard sacrifice to make, but if that means killing Windows, then mwahahaha... I mean, MS's power lies in supporting all that legacy.

[–] omega_x3@lemmy.world 44 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Team Fortran raise up, but not too fast our old bones aren't as strong as they used to be.

[–] TunaLobster@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

I updated an internal library from 77 to 90 last week. We're working quickly these days!

[–] CaptainSpaceman@lemmy.world 38 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Good luck with that, C/C++ are still crazy popular

[–] eager_eagle@lemmy.world 34 points 1 year ago

well... that's the point - if they weren't this wouldn't be a concern

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Damn, it’s been like 25 years since I touched either of those. Aside from OS development, do people really do that anymore?

[–] ArmainAP@programming.dev 9 points 1 year ago

C++ is also the standard in game dev. You may see some C# here and there, but most engines, public available or otherwise, are built on C++.

If it is a AAA game, I can assure you it is most likely made with C++.

[–] poopsmith@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Most of the embedded world uses those.

[–] CaptainSpaceman@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

https://www.geekboots.com/story/why-c-is-so-popular-and-still-the-best-programming-language

Basically, C runs the modern world. WiFi, MacOS, Windows, Linux, and so much more

[–] Subverb@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Embedded systems developer here. If you're programming on ARM or one of the other big microcontrollers there aren't many well supported options. ARM's official Keil compiler and libraries are C and C++ and I see no official movement to change that.

They have literally decades in building those tools.

Microsoft's multithreaded OS ThreadX is C code. They just bought it for a large undisclosed amount in 2018. It ain't going anywhere soon.

AWS's FreeRTOS is C. Not going anywhere.

Embedded development toolchains are very slow to change.

[–] flatpandisk@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

A large chunk of not most of robotic development is C and C++. Since working with a mixture of hardware, software, and even performance software here comes C and C++.

[–] parens@programming.dev 27 points 1 year ago (1 children)

C/C++: so bad that even the white house takes notice 😂

[–] mox@lemmy.sdf.org 23 points 1 year ago (1 children)

C isn't bad. It has been a good portable assembly language for ages, and remains so today. What's problematic is continuing to use it where more advanced languages now make more sense.

I won't defend C++, though. I'm happy to kick it to the curb now that better alternatives are gaining traction.

[–] Rednax@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

The problem with C++ is not the lack of safety features. It's the ever lasting backwards compatibility that is keeping it both alive and down at the same time.

Having to support 50 year old code, is going to limit any restriction you place. But it is usually the restrictions that make a language good.

Example: You can write perfectly good modern C++ code without any pointers. But pointers are so ingrained into the language, that it is impossible to remove them.

[–] darkevilmac@lemmy.zip 23 points 1 year ago

Probably a good idea, plenty of languages out there that can give good performance while being memory safe nowadays.

[–] Dzeimis@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

Wtf, I thought this was a meme...

[–] _NetNomad@kbin.run 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

segmentation fault (c and c++ dumped)

[–] ricdeh@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Just write memory safe code lol

[–] badbytes@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Good reason to not drop C and C++

[–] treadful@lemmy.zip 7 points 1 year ago

“We, as a nation, have the ability—and the responsibility—to reduce the attack surface in cyberspace and prevent entire classes of security bugs from entering the digital ecosystem but that means we need to tackle the hard problem of moving to memory safe programming languages,” National Cyber Director Harry Coker said in the White House news release.

o7

[–] Aopen@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 1 year ago
[–] makozuma@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Can’t we just bring back Forth and call it a day?

[–] frankenswine@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

sad stroustroup noises

[–] TypicalHog@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

I'm like absolutely convinced Rust is the shit!

load more comments
view more: next ›