Comments by "Anony Mousse" (@anon_y_mousse) on "" video.

Yeah, and his passive aggressive "hearts" on posts that tow the cult line is kind of shitty too.
6
Modern idiomatic C++ involves not even using pointers unless they're wrapped in one of the *_ptr template types, and in general you should never need them since the container types do everything that most people need anyway. There's very, very little in modern C++ that requires you to even manually finagle a pointer. Likewise, you should never need to manually manage memory in modern C++, because again, the container types make up the difference. Given this, I find that most errors in programming come from people who don't bother to check user input. This is the single biggest source of errors and it seems like either no one knows how to do it, or no one cares to try. This is a universal constant that occurs even in Rust.
4
And you can just write better code in C. Check user input and you literally eliminate all buffer overflows except those caused by logical errors. The sanitizers can pick up that slack easily.
2
Rust rewrites almost never have feature parity. I would say never, but I haven't tried every single one, only about 30, which while none of them have had feature parity don't constitute the entire set.
1
I'll say it again even though you'll never acknowledge it, but Rust has had a lifetime leakage bug for its entire existence, and chances are they won't be fixing it even in the next update. I'll also say it again that it doesn't even prevent all the memory errors it claims to prevent, it just handles them in a slightly different way than C. Buffer overflows can still happen and I've replicated this, and the program still crashes out. What's worse is the logical bugs that won't be discovered until it has had years of testing that the C version already had. Buffer overflow exploits keep happening, and it sucks, but that's because no one seemingly bothers to check user input and now they really won't with the move to Rust because they'll expect the language to do it for them. It only gets worse when you consider feature parity in most rewritten software doesn't exist. I've noticed that you've been getting sloppy with your videos over the past year and a half and you keep spouting false propaganda. I really wish I could deprogram everyone that keeps spreading lies about Rust, but it's one of the more insidious mind viruses that there is. It's like once you glom onto Rust and think of it as your god, you won't be dissuaded from turning everyone else to your cult.
1
@RustIsWinning No, I've tested a segfault.
1
@RustIsWinning It wasn't from using unsafe.
1
@RustIsWinning I didn't know there was a CVE for it. I'll have to look that up, assuming it is the same thing I found.
1
In truth the 70% figure was only from their own in-house code and really only speaks to the symptom and not the disease. The disease is not checking user input. All problems with otherwise logically correct code stem from there.
1
@RustIsWinning I know you have problems with reading comprehension, but try to read it again and maybe you'll understand what I'm saying.
1