[pjmlp]

I don't even understand how the flip from having C++ collection frameworks being bounds checked by default (Turbo Vision, BIDS, OWL, MFC, Powerplant,...) ended happing, with C++98 getting a standard library that does exactly the opposite by default, and a strong cultural resistance on WG21 to change it until goverments started talking about security liabilities and what programming languages to accept in public projects.

As for WG14, I have no hope, they ignored several proposals, and seem keen in having C being as safe as hand writing Assembly code, and even then, Assembly tends to be safer, as UB only happens when doing something the CPU did not expect, macro assemblers don't do clever optimizations.

[kragen]

i think what happened was that turbo vision, owl, mfc, etc., were mostly for line of business applications: work order tracking, mail merge databases, hotel reservations, inventory management, whatever. but since the late 90s those have moved to visual basic, perl, java, microsoft java, python, and js. only the people who really needed c++'s performance (and predictable memory footprint) kept using c++, and similarly for c

maybe as the center of gravity moves from people writing game engines and kernels to people keeping legacy code running we will get more of a constituency for bounds checking

agreed about asm being safer

[pkphilip]

Wow, you mentioned Turbo Vision, OWL etc.. what a blast from the past! had fun developing applications using them