[staticassertion]

Really? You accept responsibility? In what way has any developer ever accepted responsibility for bad code? When an engineer is negligent and a bridge collapses, they are responsible - there's a whole system of insurance around it. When a developer is negligent and user data is compromised, do they take responsibility?

No.

Should the developers of C++ take responsibility? Or just the consumers of the language? Why is one different from the other?

This entire argument that the users of C++ are at fault for everything is absurd. Users suffer for it, and no one truly takes responsibility.

[futurix]

In your example, the cause of the collapse would be that developer drove a tank onto the bridge and didn't bother to check the weight limits beforehand.

If you forgot to initialise the variable before using it - it's your problem, not the problem of the language. This is a feature of C++, not a bug. It is well documented, it is expected, and it is there for a good reason. And if you are running into this issue all the time, perhaps C++ is not for you.

[staticassertion]

> In your example, the cause of the collapse would be that developer drove a tank onto the bridge and didn't bother to check the weight limits beforehand.

I don't see how, at all, and you haven't addressed how this somehow makes the C++ developer different from an engineer.

I think your analogy is absolutely imprecise.

And the people on the bridge aren't going to care.

> If you forgot to initialise the variable before using it - it's your problem, not the problem of the language.

Wrong! It's very clearly not the developer's problem, because they don't take responsibility. It's the end user's problem, because they're the ones who get hacked.

> It is well documented, it is expected

Oh, please. As if any C++ developer can spot every instance of UB.

> it is there for a good reason

Is it? This is an unfounded statement. Is there ever a good reason to read from an uninitialized variable? It's UB, so it seems like the language is telling you explicitly that it is not a good idea. But the language gives you not way of formally verifying that you don't.

> And if you are running into this issue all the time, perhaps C++ is not for you.

Alternatively, perhaps C++ is not for any human, as it's clearly far too complicated to reason about.

[nocman]

"When a developer is negligent and user data is compromised, do they take responsibility? No."

^ Well, replace "negligent" with "makes a mistake", and I've taken responsibility plenty of times. Situations happen. You do your best to mitigate mistakes in code within the constraints of your situation, but you don't always catch everything. Corner cases arise that you did not foresee, etc.

I have missed things that have caused user data corruption (or a similar problem) before, and when it was discovered I apologized to the user(s), fixed the problem and moved on. It's an imperfect world and I'm not omniscient. Yeah plenty of developers would just patch it, move on and not tell anyone, but there are a lot of us who care about the people we write code for and do the right thing.