| > Your C/C++ programmers are likely not as well-trained as you think they are. > The list of people who can write C/C++ correctly, under pressure, and then keep it correct under maintenance, is very short. I see this assertion with increasing frequency lately. What if this list is not really as short as you think it is? People have been writing and maintaining massive C and C++ codebases all over the world for decades. These are wildly _successful_ languages. Rust is a great language, and I'm happy to witness its rise in popularity. If I'm being completely honest with myself, I love C++ for its razor's edge. Every piece of code can be _interesting_ (but normally shouldn't be, of course). The line between brilliance and insanity is fine, and exhilarating. Is good software necessarily boring? Probably. Would the world be a better place if C++ were replaced with Rust tomorrow? Probably. If I'm already competent in the exciting language, and there are plenty of places willing to pay me to write it, why should I switch to the boring language? Am I the only one who feels this way? Maybe I should go learn Perl. |