[gwmnxnp_516a]

It is possible to write safe-C, but C is far more error prone than C++. C has more implicit type conversions than C++, which may results in bugs and undefined behaviours. C lacks RAII (Resource-Acquisition Is Initialization) that is useful for memory and resource management. C will actually require more code than C++ since, the C standard library lacks generic data structures such as vectors, hash maps, linked lists and so on. The implementation of those data structures requires lots of preprocessor macro hacks.

It is possible to write safe C, only if one uses static analysis tools and undefined behaviour sanitizers. In the case presented by the article, as it is related to game, safety does not matter much, unlike device drivers, operating systems or embedded systems where C bugs can introduce security vulnerabilities.

Regarding the compile-time complaint, it is possible to reduce the compile-time by using forward declarations; forward template declarations; template forced instantiation and isolating large parts of a project in a static library using CMake.

[Koshkin]

> C is far more error prone than C++

I don't know about that... C++ (both the language and the library) is orders of magnitude more complex, and the opportunities to make mistakes have grown almost proportionally. (Two characteristic examples recently discussed here on HN: auto references and iterator invalidation.)

[gwmnxnp_516a]

But C lacks even strings, lots of C bugs and vulnerabilities are related to memory management, memory ownership and string handling. Even the C subset of C++ is better than C since it at least has more explicit type conversions that forces the developer to state his or her intent. One example of the C string problem is the strcpy(buffer, char* string) that copies a string to a buffer. If an external actor discovers how to manipulate the string size, he or she can take advantage of this buffer overflow vulnerability and even execute arbitrary code remotely if it is used in a server. If the application with this problem is a file, one create a specially crafted file to take advantage of this design flaw.

However using C in the case of the original poster does not matter much as the application is game-related not subject to untrusted input.

[funny_falcon]

strcpy - is a standard library issue, not language one. Most C projects creates their own "string handling" routines.

It is pity there is no alternative "standard library" with safer data struct and operations.

There are some attempts, for example, relatively wildly known klib: https://github.com/attractivechaos/klib

[kaba0]

There are two problems here, one being complexity, the other being abstraction power. The two correlates. C is an easy language without much complexity, but with laughably little abstraction power. Text-based macros are the worst thing ever, and other than that, the language can’t even express reusable data structures, only with convention.

C++ on the other hand has good expressivity that can better deal with complexity of programs (eg. just simply having string, vector, etc) at the expense of some added language complexity. But unfortunately most of that is due to backward compatibility.

My opinion is that program complexity is inherent for anything interesting, so the C++ tradeoff is worthwhile. Also, by sticking to a good subset of C++, one can minimize the “bad” complexity of the language, imho.