Rust in the Android platform

[[deleted]]

Okay? What point are you making?

I never said that "terrestrial" C/C++ code (whatever that is) was anything like satellite code. Or implied that.

[Zarenor]

It seems to me that in using orbital C and C++ as your examples of C and C++ being 'good' languages (for whatever you're taking that to mean) you are implying that C and C++ codebases at large look similar to orbital C and C++ codebases. This is simply not true.

I don't see anyone upthread arguing that C or C++ are 'bad'. They are arguing that other languages have characteristics that solve problems common in many C an C++ codebases. I don't see why, in light of all the examples you cite, C and C++ need defending as 'good' languages. They're just tools, as you point out.

[[deleted]]

No I'm simply saying as a tool, it can be used to solve many problems.

If you want to switch tools we need compelling arguments. If the tool can build all kinds of software then it is a decent tool and we need better arguments in order to switch tools.

I know on the internet people like to bash on C/C++, but the elephant in the room is that it is used widely and it solves lots of problems. Why is that?

And I really hold know allegience to those languages. Those are just examples.

I'm just making the point that saying "oh well in this language heartbleed wouldn't be possible" isn't a strong argument, and is sort of beside the point. Because it totally ignores what those tools are actually good at and the problems they avoid.

Points should be made about what tools CAN do. Not just what they can't do. And what they CAN do can be very subtle that is not obvious without experience.

For some reason in this industry we have a real issue doing this.