Programming in C must be BANNED

Feel free to code in other language.
No one is stopping you.

File: 1487430916335.jpg (704KB, 768x1024px) Image search: [Google]

704KB, 768x1024px

You ever wonder if these articles are shared almost exclusively by webdev cunts who think systems programming is monolithic and impenetrable to get into?
They fear what they don't understand, so they share another "OMG C IS BAD" article to make themselves feel better about their complete lack of understanding of anything that happens below their cushy javascript environment.

>>59053646
>murder should be illegal
>uhhh feel free to not kill people bro no ones forcing you haha

>>59053612
this is why c++ NEEDS TO BE STANDARD

>>59053670
C++ has ALL of C's flaws, with none of the benefits added since 1982.

>>59053663
Second rate programmers like to justify their life choices working as webdev. No shit.

>>59053667
>>59053667

>that dumb children argument

Now I know why you can't code in C

git gud,
faggot

>sepples

Every language has attack vectors dumb ass

>>59053612
>Believing Java is a secure programming language free of exploits
>Believing anything used for a 'large' public is secure against exploits

>>59053679
then why is c++ so widely used?

>>59053782
Bjarne is good with marketing.

>>59053782
It's not.
C++ is only relevant in game development these days, and only because people are afraid of C

>>59053802
It was a great OOP and come early. That's all. Bjarne can't give away a free Ford GT.

>>59053612
you are right, let's write operating systems in java.. or even better, in python !

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnWhqhNdYyk

Autismo will hate this.

Daily reminder it has been imperially proven Ada is easier, cheaper, and safer to use while being more powerful.

>>59053612
Yeah good luck getting me to switch over all my incredibly computationally intensive simulation code to Ada or Java.

Doesn't matter what happens, for the kind of work I do (physical simulations) there will always be the need for C. I would bet that this will still be true in a hundred years time (if we're still around).

>>59053879
CPPcon is both hilarious and sad.
Half their talks have to do with trying to convince people to use C++ for any reason.
>y-you should be writing embedded C++!
>applications code should come back to C++!
>games programming is C++ is still king!
>how to discuss C++ with C programmers
>s-stop writing C!!!!!

I don't know they even have a con still, fucking nobody writes C++ anymore.

>>59053896
haven't programmed ada in a while, but i love the type system.
it's a actually pretty nice language, no idea why it's almost dead now.

>>59053663
>this actual projection

>>59053663
Besides the fact that you're a dumb animuposter, unironically defend this:

#include<stdio.h>
int
main()
{
    char str1[]= "Niggers tongue my anus";
    char str2[40];
    
    for (int i = 0; i < 40; ++i) str2[i] = 'h';
    
    strncpy (str2, str1, 5);
    for (int i = 0; i < 40; ++i)
        printf("%c" , str2[i]);
        
    puts("");
}

Output:

Niggehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Notice anything? How can you possibly justify this? How shit can your "language" be?

>>59053612
>Of course, mass buffer overflows are only one indication of the security nightmare that plagues the language

Actually, all high-profile vulnerabilities are related to buffer overflows. There's not much else to blame.

>>59053919
Just don't suck at coding in C, it's that simple.

>>59053612

It should have been banned two fucking decades ago, programmers are morons with an overblown illusion of control and competence.

>>59053936
Bugs happen. You obviously know zilch about software engineering.

>>59053942
Bugs aren't exclusive to C. As long as you aren't a retard and know how to debug then you're all set.

>>59053919
>writing off the end of the array
>WHY IS IT DOING WEIRD THINGS?!??!?!

That's called undefined behavior, dumbass.

>>59053932

Type inference is good at fucking shit up too. Race conditions too.

Hence Rust, the execution might be lacking, but their identification of what is necessary to make a language safe is spot on.

>>59053913
Autism finds it hard to use real strong typing

>>59053955
But in C they're catastrophic. That's undefendable. Other languages fail properly without compromising your entire system.

>>59053958
You didn't undestand. It failed to nul-terminate a copied string. strncpy promises to nul-terminate your string, but sometimes it doesn't. That's how shitty C is.

>>59053903
B-but isn't C++ king of languages?

>>59053955

Bad programmers will ensure you will experience economic damage for shit they fucked up.

File: Screenshot - 02212017 - 12:24:53 PM.png (97KB, 1079x601px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 1079x601px

>>59053985
>strncpy promises to nul-terminate your string

Are you retarded?

>>59053919
I see nothing wrong with this code

Am I missing something or is anon retarded?

>>59053985
As I said, if you have properly debugged your C code then you're all set. If someone else fucks up using your code then that's their fault.

Also I care little for the exception-handling capabilities of other languages when I absolutely need as much efficiency as possible for simulation code (which I do).

>>59053989
Maybe 20 years ago.
Everyone jumped to other more domain specific languages instead of continuing to use C++, the jack of all trades, master of none language.

>>59054005
So even the manual writers realized that C is inconsistent, and yet you didn't know that yet?

Fuck off.

>>59054016
You're missing the fact that there's no nul-termination in the copied string. C failed. Your buffer overran. Now an attacker can read your credit card number.

>>59053646

Sometimes you just can't fix things by going solo. It's well beyond time to gas C programmers.

>>59054005
>Beware of buffer overruns!
What is that if not an admission that the language sucks?

>>59054005
Dude, it's /g/. Just let it go.

>>59054038
>manual writers
It's defined that way in the standard.
C standard library functions trust the programmer to not do stupid things.
If you need null checks and array bounds, you do them yourself, the functions shouldn't be wasting needless clock cycles assuming you're retarded, because it leads to redundant code.

>>59053612
>too stupid to write proper C code
>too stupid to use asan/lsan/etc to properly test your shit before shipping it
>somehow this is the language's fault
lmao, fucking webdev brainlets

>>59053960

Well, you're not wrong at all, but "C creates insecure software and must be banned" is different from "Rust exists".

>>59054038
>You're missing the fact that there's no nul-termination in the copied string

>I copied characters from one array to another, and it worked WAAAAHHHHH

So... retarded then?


>http://www.cplusplus.com/reference/cstring/strncpy/
>Copies the first num characters of source to destination.
Reading comprehension.

>>59054038
>>59054050
>t. Java "programmers" who don't understand the very concept of C programming

>>59054072
>you shouldn't waste clock cycles with security
C-fags, everyone!

>>59054072
Checking array bounds and providing a proper string implementation isn't that expensive. Pascal is just as low-level as C and does it just fine.

>>59054123
pascal strings are limited to 255 characters, that's not very useful

>>59054107
Don't blame standard methods for working exactly as intended.

>>59054107
>thinks it's acceptable to do """security-checks""" when they're not explicitly necessary in performance-intensive C code

Never work on simulations.

Can someone explain the difference between memcpy and strncpy?
They seem identical in behavior, I always use memcpy.

>>59054005
>tells strncpy to copy the first 5 characters
>expects it to copy something that isn't there
Are you fucking retarded?

>>59053782
because microsoft pushed it

>>59053898
Why would one choose C over C++ for simulations? Or do people just kind of end up mixing the two? Trying to get into simulations myself.

File: 1438684259138.png (251KB, 1190x906px) Image search: [Google]

251KB, 1190x906px

>>59054131

http://docwiki.embarcadero.com/RADStudio/Berlin/en/String_Types_(Delphi)

Congratulations at failing. You earn nothing.

>>59054159
You overwrote the null terminator dumbass.
You're responsible for allocating enough space for it, and if that's somehow not possible, you're responsible for putting it back before attempting to run another string.h library function on it again.

>>59054138
>it's okay if the behaviour is retarded as long as that was the intended behaviour
You're not making your case any stronger, C-fags. If anything, you're just embarrassing yourselves further.

>>59053612
>incompetent programmers create a non-perfect program
>compiler compiles the code expection the program to be good
>people blame the compiler/the language
>shitty programmers get off scott free

Bad programmers in mission critical shit should be BANNED.

>>59054159
>>59054185
Meant to quote >>59053919

Okay, here's another example of C's idiocy:

void
wtf(char *str) {
    char newstr[80];
    
    strlcpy(newstr, str, 80);
}

int
main() {
    char c, buf[4096];
    int i=0;
    
    while ((buf[i++] = getchar()) != '\n');
    
    i=1;
    wtf(buf);
    i=2;
    
    printf("i = %d\n", i);
    
    return 0;
}

Input 160 characters. Resulting output:

i = 1

Instruction at line 17 (namely, i=2) gets completely skipped, and you get the wrong output.

WTF kinda language is this that randomly skips AN ENTIRE LINE OF CODE THAT YOU GAVE IT?!?!?!?

>>59053919

When you're copying part of a string into another string, you usually don't want the bigger string to be interrupted like this.

After all, if all you want is a string of first N characters, you can do that with the original string... and not use strncpy() at all.

strncpy() is designed correctly for its use case.

>>59054203
Why don't programmers have any kind of real certification process?

>>59054171
For most uses there's not a huge difference in timing between C and C++, but for the simulation work I tend to do I need to squeeze every available bit of performance out as possible (time-domain simulations are a bitch) so using C is really the only way to go.

Plus it's slightly easier to call from my Python graphing interfaces (using ctypes) due to C++ name-mangling - obviously you only need to add some "extern"s in c++, but why bother when you can use C which is faster for these simulations anyway.

>>59054203
this 100%

>>59054203
>all other languages don't have this problem
>but it's the coders' fault, not my language! my language is purrrfect!
Yeah nah.

>>59054211
strlcpy isn't a standard library function
fuck off


I also don't understand the sentiment in this thread.
If C was wildly unpredictable and impossible to use as a software engineering tool, nobody would use it.

>>59054211
compiler/flags?

You're right, OP. Instead, let's work with languages whose INTERPRETERS are written in C.

>>59054263
Sorry, I pasted by accident the fixed code instead that I use to teach my students how to workaround such language flaws. The original example was taken straight from the FreeBSD documentation and doesn't use anything non-standard. See: https://docs.freebsd.org/doc/4.3-RELEASE/usr/share/doc/en/books/developers-handbook/x1136.html

But the fact that you need non-standard kludges like strlcat and strlcpy to make C even usable tells you a lot about the language.

>>59054296
Nim's interpreter/compiler is written in Nim.

>>59054227
Lets say I was doing 3d simulations. Is OOP a good Idea? If it is, Should I use C++ or some C implementation of OOP?

>>59054255
Learn the language you're using from inside out.
Don't rely on copy pasting stack overflow and cry a river when shit goes bad.

The language was created and is good. If you know how to use it correctly, nothing bad will happen.

So yes, it's the coder's fault.

>>59054322
I know the language. I exploit it professionaly. Thanks for keeping using C, all your buffer overflows make my living, you faggot.

>>59054335
>implying you're getting buffer overflows from me

>>59054297
>But the fact that you need non-standard kludges

No you don't.
It says nothing about the language.
People are simply too stupid to implement these functions themselves because modern programming ideology scorns implementing your own libraries for any reason.

>>59054318

Nim compiles to C.

>>59054211
That seems like an issue with strlcpy().
Do that with strncpy() with proper buffer management and then complain.
>>59054297
But you don't, all strlcpy() is is a shortcut to doing it right with strncpy(). As long as retards stay away from C it's fine. This is true of any language.

>>59054319
I couldn't tell you without knowing what it is you intend to do. If it's all in the steady state (i.e. not time-domain) then performance isn't really a big issue and you can get away with using something like Python (with numpy of course).

Also if it's a problem which can be heavily parallelised then you'll want to go down the CUDA / OpenCL/GL route (or any other good GPU acceleration techniques).

>>59054263

>If C was wildly unpredictable and impossible to use as a software engineering tool, nobody would use it.

Provide an actual argument for that claim.

>>59054335
Real C programmers don't write code with buffer overflows. Have fun depending on the mistakes of amateur fuckwits.

>>59054335
Are you the infamous hacker 4chan?

File: Goodnight,_sweet_prince.png (56KB, 1170x604px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 1170x604px

>>59054263
>If C was wildly unpredictable and impossible to use as a software engineering tool, nobody would use it.
The matter of the fact is C is plummeting quickly as modern alternatives emerge.

It's been used for so long due to legacy code and maturity, but it's getting to a point when it's simply unsustainable any longer.

File: 1458129844140.png (59KB, 817x157px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 817x157px

>>59054211
???

>>59054343

You're an useful idiot by promoting a language who's continued use hurts almost all of us, except the security """researchers""".

>>59054335

Are you one of the "ethical" ones who only sell to security agencies the UN likes and large multinationals. Or are you honest with yourself and simply sell period?

>>59054370
>That seems like an issue with strlcpy().
No, the error doesn't happen on that code. I mispasted. See >>59054297

>>59054335
>I know the language
Sure thing, Pajeet.

>>59054390
As long as people are writing low-level programs without sacrificing portability, C will never go away.

>>59054382
Nobody is a real C programmer then.

>>59054403
I see, your post makes sense now.

>>59054396
See >>59054403

>>59054345
>No you don't.
Of course you do. Those functions are everywhere from the Linux kernel to the iPhone.

>>59054318
It was probably originally made in C though and bootstrapped to Nim later on. Then the newer versions of Nim are made with the older versions.

>>59054433
>linux kernel
linux isn't bsd faggot

>>59054369
Currently.

>>59054415
Just because your 1st year degree-course C code breaks horrendously with undefined behaviour, doesn't mean everyone else's does.

>>59054439

https://github.com/torvalds/linux/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=strlcpy

>>59054156

memcpy() copies "num" bytes, always.

strncpy() writes "num" bytes. Not all of them are necessarily copies; it stops copying after it encounters a null terminator in the source, and writes null terminators for the rest of the specified bytes.

strcpy() copies bytes until it finds and copies a null terminator from the source. It doesn't take a "num" argument.

>>59054433
strlcpy() is just a convenience function, you can do proper buffer management with the standard library using strncpy() by giving strncpy one less than the buffer size, then NULL terminating it yourself.

>>59054448
Yeah. Except everyone else's does too. Buffer overflows in C code are widespread even in high-quality code written by seasoned skilled programmers.

>>59054486
Your entire argument hangs on
>b-b-b-b-but your wrong! all C code is bad! there's no such thing as safe C code!! AAAAAAAAAAAA!!!

You have nothing interesting to say and you're merely wasting people's time.

>>59054486
Conformation bias. ALL performance critical code has to use a memory unsafe language. If it wasn't C you faggots would be bitching about something else.

File: 1479596863096.png (20KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 640x480px

Ada's "strcpy" gives you the power to throw an error, or cut the right or left if the string doesn't fit the destination. It also allows you to pick the padding character if its smaller and the alignment into the target string.

C's strcpy breaks.

Really making me think...

>>59054501
>loses argument
>resorts to strawman
>dismisses me
Great. I was fed up with you anyway.

File: 1471849982366.png (124KB, 813x453px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 813x453px

>>59054433
wew

>>59054511
Ada is pretty based. Still not as fast as C though.

>>59054542
>>59054503
GOTTA GO FAST

Are there really people too stupid to write C?
It used to be taught as a beginners language for a long fucking time until microsoft and oracle had their way with the education system.

>>59054191
There are a million ways to implement what you want, stop being an utter idiot and blaming a method for doing what it says it does.

>>59054546
Of course. Identity thieves can't be left waiting, anon. They need to be able to steal your personal info as quickly as possible. Keep using C.

>>59054561
Good luck programming a microcontroller in fucking Java or whatever Pajeet-tier language you prefer.

>>59054503
Apparently you don't know much about performance.

>>59054561
109thpbp

>security is not important
>only SPEEEEED is
This is what C-tards unironically believe.

File: Redox_OS.png (1MB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1024x768px

>>59054568
Reminder that C is deprecated. Stay rectally shattered.

File: 1395977881801.jpg (80KB, 413x395px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 413x395px

>>59054583

>C-fags are the Jeremy Clarksons of the software world

>>59054583
"I can't write safe code without being babysit"

File: government-citizen-id-using-java-card-platform-4-728.jpg (88KB, 728x546px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 728x546px

>>59054568
Java has large adoption in the embedded space precisely because C is so insecure.

>>59054583
Try implementing my C-based simulation code in any of your shit-tier """security-checking""" languages. Have fun waiting at least 10x longer for results.

File: 1474824416008.jpg (15KB, 216x228px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 216x228px

>computer crime

>>59053612
In Aero and Auto industries, the use of C is prevalent. But of course in both cases, the systems, and therefore the code that runs it, must be absolutely bullet proof.

How is this achieved? Compliance. There are standards out there that the code adheres to, which limits down the C you are allowed to write. Things like the ability overflow are blocked off. It shouldn't take a lot for C compilers to implement at least a warning to say "this could be overflowed here, you should probably put a check in" and then you can justify that warning if you KNOW that this will always be limited in length.

So I blame the compilers for not properly checking these things. MISRA compliance or similar should be implemented on critical (i.e. business) use of C code.

>>59054580
Okay then, educate me. Run time safety constructs absolutely destroy performance. Language safety features are only there to prevent shitty code. Any non pajeet should know this.
>>59054583
If you value builtin security over speed, then don't use speed you fucking street shitter. Unfortunately 99.99% of systems programming requires speed over builtin safety, because the people in that field are not third world trash.

>>59053919
Use strlcpy

>>59054637
Meant for >>59054546

>>59054619
Comparing Java's presence in embedded space to C is hilarious.

>>59054625
You're seriously over estimating the difference in compiled languages. It's miniscule.

>>59054583
I guess you walk everywhere instead of driving or using public transport, after all, security is the most important thing, no? :^)

Has anyone considered using a higher-level/more secure language for network interface and data input checking (Lisp, for instance) and just use C for hardware access (that is where it excels over all languages)?

>>59054650
Look at any performance test. C is miles above everything else, and memory safe languages like rust and golang trail behind c++. There absolutely is a difference in non-trivial code.

>>59054650
Wrong. My code has to perform several hundred million iterations in multiple function calls every time-step of the simulation - I've tested with other compiled languages and they are all significantly slower than C over long time-scales. It all adds up.

>>59054650
>miniscule
http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/compare.php?lang=gcc&lang2=rust

>>59054649
I don't think you can read. If C were secure then JavaCard wouldn't even have a reason to exist.

>>59054664
>>59054687
>Rust
?? Proggit culture needs to leave

>>59054674
No offense, but it's possible to make system languages just as fast as c if you know when you're doing. The is nothing intrinsically different between them once they are compiled.

>>59054701
Java is not secure.
>>59054740

The beauty of C is that if you don't like how it does certain things you make how you want to be, such as String handling.

>>59053612
A programming language will not protect you from writing retarded shit code with vulnerability in it.

>>59053612
>shit trumptards say

If you're too stupid to code in C choose another language

>>59054740
>he has never written a compiler

>>59053663
You ever wonder if these replies are written almost exclusively by know-it-all first year CS cunts who think their expertise in C programming makes their code secure?
They dont't fear what they don't understand, so they write another "OMG WEBDEVS GET OUT C IS THE FASTEST" post to make themselves feel better about their complete lack of care about security and appear all smug and superior for choosing C as their main language even though C wizards that have been using the language since K&R still can't avoid hidden pitfalls that end up putting everyone at the mercy of criminals and the surveillance state.

>>59054740
>mentions rust as a systems language
>reddit
I think you are the one who needs to leave.

There seems to be a misunderstanding about what makes "safe" code here. Even your java and rust parjeet languages eventually boil down to machine code. All those safety feature like bound checks can be implemented c. The only difference is the responsibilty falls on the programmer to know when these checks are necessary. You can write perfectly safe code in c if you know what you're doing.

Neo-/g/ everyone.

>>59054778
Woah buddy I write embedded java and it runs 30 checks every time a for loop is incremented. 100% secure.

>>59054778

There are patterns to bugs and language features to mitigate them.

C is an anti-pattern.

>>59054781
Go look at the Assembly, you'll notice a lot of similarities if you avoid the standard libraries.

>>59054795
You brought it up

>>59054131
strlen is O(1) rather than O(n) which is huge
C strings are pretty bad

>>59054796

>All those safety feature like bound checks can be implemented c.

So lets say you implement share nothing parallelism, bounds checking, a sane rune time library etc etc AND the code sanitizer to make sure the utterly retarded C programmers don't just use the old unsafe language features.

Congratulations, you made a new language.

>>59054825
It is a systems language, it is supposed to be a competitor to c++, so it is at least worth mentioning.

>>59054796
>You can write perfectly safe code in c if you know what you're doing.
History tends to show that C programmers who know what they are doing are quite rare.

>>59054633
>aero and auto industries
Every industry is manufacturing because EVERYTHING is written in C. Except programmable logic controllers.

>>59054825
>if you avoid the standard libraries
So, it looks similar to C in assembly, if I program in it as if I am using C?
Really makes you think.

>>59054861
You are underestimating the amount of C you rely on to make this single shitpost.

>>59054861
Maybe in 5 years

>>59054878
Languages are more than the standard library, but I suppose not in C's case ;)

>>59054852
But you don't need all of those all the time. The point is that the programmer has the choice to add checks on a case by case basis. Something that takes user input can be made fast while something like a ray tracer can be as effecient as possible.

>>59053919
That is intended. Have you read the documentation?

> https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/xdsywd25.aspx
The strncpy function copies the initial count characters of strSource to strDest and returns strDest. If count is less than or equal to the length of strSource, a null character is not appended automatically to the copied string. If count is greater than the length of strSource, the destination string is padded with null characters up to length count. The behavior of strncpy is undefined if the source and destination strings overlap.

>>59054901
Meant safe instead of fast.

>>59054889
>>59054888
I don't actually like rust desu.

>>59054888
Meant for
>>59054874

>>59054917
Neither do I, let's stop taking about it.

>>59054930
No, I know exactly how much C is used in critical places like crypto libs and it scares me.

>>59054297
>assign fixed size buffer
>copy input of unspecified input into it
woah
You could assign it dynamically, based on the size
You could check whether the string is longer than the buffer
etc.
>too much work
then use another language, C++ does this nice and safe. You could also use a library.

>>59054390
what is that statistic based on?

>>59054901

But we do need it most of the time, we've known we needed it most of the time for decades.

>MAGA hat
>on lain

jesus christ

>>59054955
Not knowing why crypto implementation in high level languages is horrible shows us how much of a pajeet you are.

>>59054653
Driving is statistically safer than walking, you mouthbreather.

>>59054955

The actual crypto is small enough to verify even in C.

It's all the key handling, generation and exchange shit which doesn't need to go fast which shouldn't be done in C.

>>59055065
But cars are so much more dangerous and prone to failure in many more ways.

>>59054687
Oh look, the retard who keeps posting the same refuted, autistic Debian shitmarks!

That link should be filtered by the spam filter.

>>59054836
>i learned big o yesterday am i smart yet

if this is a real issue to you, you're not going to use normal c strings, you'll roll your own string library
really, all you need is an extra int measuring the size.

Toasting in epic bread.

>>59055094
>I don't like the results so the benchmarks are bad!!!

>>59054913
That's what makes it even worse. If this kind of autistic unpredictable behaviour were a mistake or an overlook, but it was what they seriously and unironically intended.

>>59053612
>systems programming increasingly outsourced to Indians or insourced to visa holding Indians
>vulnerabilities skyrocket
>it's a problem with the language guys

Nope, sorry. You get what you pay for. These companies have been cutting costs at the developer level for decades and now all of a sudden muh C is the problem? Get real guys.

>muh Java
Yeah good luck doing honest to god systems programming in Java.

>muh Haskell
Not in your wildest autistic dreams.

>muh Ada
K. Keep me posted.

>>59054617
Well yes that is basically what you guys prove every time another gaping security hole is caused because of C. Programmers are too stupid for C not the other way around.

File: strncpy_s.png (128KB, 1571x1313px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 1571x1313px

>>59053919
Use strcpy_s then, and it will null terminate for you, it's even ran in release mode.

>>59055136
You are unironically believing a benchmark in which Java appears to be fast. Everybody knows that is an impossibility and that therefore those numbers must be fabricated.

>>59055197
Appears "fast" compared to what.

>>59053782

#1 large library of code
#2 good graphic libraries

Its pretty much momentum.

>>59055151
>vulnerabilities skyrocketed recently
You haven't been around a long time, have you?

>>59055149
What the fuck man it's just a copy function how is it unpredictable ?
Now I understand why Java is so popular, litteral brainlets can't into C

>>59055251
>Pajeet outsourcing began recently
You smell like curry and shame.

>>59054740
>No offense, but it's possible to make system languages just as fast as c if you know when you're doing. The is nothing intrinsically different between them once they are compiled.


Compilers aren't perfect though.
Even for different C compilers you get measurable differences. For other languages(with inferior compilers) the difference is much bigger.
That alone makes a huge difference.

>>59055082
That is what I was implying. Don't be pedantic just for the sake of being pedantic. You understood what I meant.

>>59055151
There's goto fail and then there's bugs that are much more subtle. Don't pretend that experts don't make mistakes.

Why is Ada's tasking system so much better than anything c or c++ have ever done?

>>59055288
I know the "pajeet" thing is satire and all, but it stopped being funny a while ago. Now it's just racist. You can stop already.

>>59055384
wtf ? c doesn't even support threading. your question is retarded

>>59055445
While I understand what you mean, c has threading in the standard as of 5 years ago.

>>59055445

>C doesn't even support threading
Are you retarded?

Whats the safest language to learn ?
Go or Rust or Haskell or Scheme/Racket?

>>59055353
>Don't pretend that experts don't make mistakes.

And non-expert cheap labor makes more mistakes.

>>59055435
Like this guy who is here vigorously defending his honor.

>>59055472
Actually that's one of the few things that irritates me in C - the fact that <threads.h> STILL isn't supported properly in libgcc. I guess that's more of an implementation issue with GCC rather than problem with C itself, but still they need to get a move on and actually implement that shit.

>>59055384
It also has a fookin metal name

>>59055472
shit, you are right, now i feel like a retard. i completely forgot about c11 because it's not really used anywhere.

>>59055527
That's a glibc issue, not GCC.

Also pthreads has existed for decades.
Just use that.
A threads.h compliant library would just be a wrapper for pthreads anyway.

>>59055491
Rust

>>59055582
Yes, sorry, meant glibc not GCC. Indeed I just use pthreads of course, would be nice to have <threads.h> support for multi-platform but who am I kidding? I write all my C in GNU/Linux anyway.

>>59055129
indeed, the alternative is just as simple

File: 1472694730638.jpg (69KB, 678x516px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 678x516px

>>59055536
Ravenscar profile

>>59053919
You dropped this
> #include <string.h>

>>59055045
It's not Lain, it's the other Lain

File: 1485656680637.jpg (65KB, 750x529px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 750x529px

>>59053812
>C++ is only relevant in game development these days

>>59055491
Racket

>>59053938
literally this

>>59056065
t. Java "programmer"

Advantages of using C:

1.In the case of robot rebellion, they could stopped and crashed.
2.If we get embedded into a virtual Matrix, hack a way out.
3.Job security:C programs always have bugs and adding features with bugs is incredibly easy.
4.Hacking:C programs are incredibly easy to hack into and within.
5.Writing semi-portable assembler code, viruses and exploits.
6.Debugging: Support a vast debugging ecosystem.
7.Virus-prone:Support the entire anti-virus/anti-malware industry.
8.Code ownership:Code which is modified by third-party unaware of subtle design choices will contain bugs. Most C code is sparsely commented. Thus code can only belong to one who fully understands the system.
9.Optimize:Ability to optimize low-level and platform specific code. Win all benchmarks.
10.CIA:CIA niggers love C and obama wakes up in the morning every day asking himself how to screw with God's people today? I know, forcing everyone to use C with my 'C'IA china-niggers that will rot in hell.

>>59053697
did you just sign your name as faggot?
fits with your character

>>59053612
>only C can have buffer overflows
>t. Shit Web Dev

>>59056333
Terry uses a dialect of C, so don't act all high and mighty using terms like CIA nigger

>>59053612

as a c++ programmer recently I've applied for a position as a CS professor so I can program like a homosexual philosopher in haskell

I just got so tired of my buffers overflowing

File: hayek.jpg (61KB, 900x750px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 900x750px

>>59053612
>ban things
no

File: rating.png (33KB, 966x591px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 966x591px

*sips tea*

File: speed.png (54KB, 1344x770px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 1344x770px

*takes another sip*

>>59054549
It probably was, until the level of "beginner" was dumbed down so that anyone who has seen a "hello world" of any language can call themselves a beginner programmer.

>>59057218
>>59057159
fuck off you pretentious desk jockey

>>59053919
>why does the computer do exactly what I tell it to do?

>>59053896
>imperially proven

Like with a decree?

>>59055613
Don't use glibc then. Musl has C11 threads, and you can statically link libc in musl.

>>59057066
Hayek should be illegal.

>>59054597
rust is a meme and useless

>>59055491
Racket

>>59057159
You must've missed >>59054390

>>59057218
>even go is faster
kek

>>59054263
Go back to bed, Ulrich! You ruined glibc!

File: Apple_Goto_Fail_SSL_Bug_Wide.png (32KB, 693x607px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 693x607px

>>59053646
I honestly feel like this thing is the fault of people not using the right tools and not the language itself. They've had tools to work with C since the beginning, like compilers (cc, yacc), linters, parsers, and more.
>It is time we take a serious look at the epidemic of exploits in C land, and begin to implement real solutions; they are out there.
Static analysis, compiler messages, runtime debugging, and other kinds of ways to automatically analyze and test your programs for potential issues, have only improved since the 70's. Style policies are too lax too, not enough people enforce or care about code style/consistancy, by enforcing one and treating inconsistencies as syntax errors you can prevent things like pic related when working with teams. That could have been prevented by enforcing braces on all ifs or even making sure there is a newline between them.

I will say that one thing I like about Go is the toolset they have as part of their standard distribution, most of the things I mentioned before for C are provided by the vendor with Go, instead of relying on the developer to find a third party tool to do it for them. Including things like dependency management, a testing framework, documentation system, and more. All these things exist for C and have existed much longer but people don't really use them as much as they should, but an issue with them is that there's no real 1 defacto standard, people use whatever they like and may not be familiar with other systems. With Go it's all the same for everyone on every platform so there's no reason not to use the tools that ship with it and you don't have to go out and find them yourself (although you could use third party stuff and some developers do).

MODS STICKY THIS THREAD RIGHT NOW

>>59057159
>C falling harder than almost all languages combined

File: 1486275222031.png (139KB, 228x260px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 228x260px

>>59057218
>Go faster than C

>>59053612
Rust doesn't have this problem

>>59053879
C fags rekt

Can I get some advice in how to hack my ex?

File: 1487726301017.jpg (216KB, 1918x1080px) Image search: [Google]

216KB, 1918x1080px

>>59057218
How the fuck is asm slower then c?

any1 still has a mega of those tools?

I replaced the hdd i had them on since the SMART status is bad as fuck for 2 years now and since the archive is 350mb downloading them from the source will still take 20min

Hurr durr hurr

Who else knew how broken C/C++ are? If you are looking for a safer project go with Rust

>>59058064
With a hatchet?

>>59058110
I meant her PC but that would work better, thank you
Any tips to get rid of her body?

>>59055045
your point?

>>59057218
wtf i love java now

>>59053903
>fucking nobody writes C++ anymore.
/g/ really is going off the deep end

>>59054390

>TIOBE

lol.You know thats based solely on search engine queries right?

Here try this:
http://spectrum.ieee.org/static/interactive-the-top-programming-languages-2016

>>59058238
You meant to quote >>59057159

File: 240_F_72580402_jZ8WZtwnGMgOL2b1ScIaAYWSqMKuljsL.jpg (17KB, 361x240px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 361x240px

>>59058238
>taking any ranking where HTML figures as a programming language seriously

>>59058078
1) It's a broken test implemented by an idiot
2) ASM and C both scored 10

>>59056349
Kek

>>59057218
I remember this stupid test being touted ages ago.
It's completely retarded and was testing the stupid thing.
The only reason that languages are faster than C/C++/Asm here is because the fucking thing they were testing was being optimised out.

>>59055491
Haskell isn't anywhere near as safe as you might expect.
Rust has tighter guarantees from a less forgiving compiler
Golang is a bit retro in the division of responsibilities between compile-time and runtime, you can walk into the marsh of unsafety pretty easily in Go
Racket lol good one

>>59058078

Hand-written ASM. Humans suck at writing assembly, or else we wouldn't need optimizing compilers.

>>59058320
>stupid
stupidest*

>>59056507

> Terry's JIT holy C compiler has anything to do with C

found the nigger

>>59053879
Good talk, within 16 minutes she mentioned everything I wish I had been taught earlier when learning C++ for someone with a C background. I already knew C I wanted to learn C++ but most C++ courses teach C first regardless and then C++ is the second half.

>>59058273

no. the post i quoted is using tiobe as is the one you quoted. It's a meme

>>59058364
It wouldn't be called HolyC if it wasn't a dialect of C,
faggot.

>>59058383
To be cynical, nothing will fix the fact that the vast majority of programming courses are terrible.

File: 6a0120a85dcdae970b0128776fca4e970c-pi.png (3KB, 337x571px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 337x571px

>>59057218

>>59053612
https://blog.golang.org/slices

File: Ifeelit.jpg (24KB, 720x557px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 720x557px

>>59058400
You're not wrong.

>>59054038
>So even the manual writers realized that C is inconsistent
Are you retarded?
You said
>this function should do thing!
the manual said
>hey watch out this function does not do thing its your responsibility
how can you possibly conclude this is an admission of inconsistency?

>>59056349
LOL good 1

>>59053670
Weird way to spell rust, given that C++ doesn't have a single advantage over C in that regard.

>>59053738
This is completely non-sequitur. Regardless, "java" is free of exploits. What isn't free of exploits is the java VM, and there doesn't exist a single good, safe java VM. Care to guess in which language the java VMs are implemented?

>>59053879

You know that C++ lets you do everything that C does

they could probably be merged into 1 language.

>>59058586
I don't think you finished his post. The last word was 'standard', which rust doesn't have.

>>59058612
You can't be serious. Are you really unironically proud of announcing to everyone that you're too retarded to follow literally the first link on google before proving yourself to have no clue what you're saying?

>>59058637
Who's on the committee? When do they meet? Did they file to ISO?

>>59058412
>using Hello World as a benchmark

>run fuzzing tests on random C project
>12 CVEs

who the fuck uses this shit?

>>59058784
People stuck in the 80's

>>59058599
C is free of exploits as well. According to the language specification, any time undefined behavior occurs, the universe is destroyed and replaced by one with non-idiotic programmers.

>>59058799
>replaced by one with non-idiotic programmers.
Why do I smell the NEET out of your post?

>>59058611

They merged them in to one language called C++.

The only valid reason to continue to use C is for platforms where no C++ support exists.

>>59054038
no nul-termination in the copied string

Because you didn't put one in there, strcpy removes the null byte from the first string and then adds the second string; using it's \0

Although, a lot of C compilers would have added the null byte for you

>>59058784
>>run fuzzing tests on random C project
>>12 CVEs
top kek

>>59058822
Because NEETs don't tend to bathe often.

>>59058637
It's a high schooler doesn't know what a engineering standard is, but still acts like a pompous retard episode.

>>59058921
www.google.com

>>59053667
Brainlet that can't code in C detected.

>>59058972
>he says while using the word 'code' unironically

>>59058957

File: 1476942934266.jpg (30KB, 456x402px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 456x402px

>all this energy being wasted discussing whether or not C should be banned when the only "language" which should be banned is PHP

C is a great language and I only really understood how to program when I learned all the fundamentals with C back in college. Meanwhile, PHP is still a fucking thing because of faggots like Zuckberg and Wordpress.

>>59059195
>C is a great language
You are cancer itself. No wonder you like C -- it's in the name. Twice even.

>>59053919
>needing all this complication for what could easily be done with

puts "Niggers"

>in ruby

>>59053612
why is lain wearing that modern day dunce cap?

>>59059572
Good joke, Anon.

>>59059241
Let me guess, your OS has a kernel written in Ruby? No? Maybe Haskell? How about Javascript?

>>59059850
Rust.
Checkmate, inbred.

>>59059850
>it's actively used and therefore can't be shit
>>59059241

>>59054191
>>it's okay if the behaviour is retarded as long as that was the intended behaviour
holy shit dude, I couldnt stop laughing for at least 5 minutes

>>59053612
Is this why YouTube when down for maintenance today?

>>59058599
C would be "free of exploits" too if it only ran in a sandboxed virtual machine that didn't have any exploits.

>>59058292
But anon, it is a programming language. Sure, in practice it's only used for markup, but it's turing complete.

http://lemire.me/blog/2011/03/08/breaking-news-htmlcss-is-turing-complete/

>shit on webdev
>use a PHP website 16 hours a day

>>59053919
There is LITERALLY nothing wrong with that.

Just because you are incompetent and cant implement a proper for loop which checks if the string has ended, the language doesnt need to be banned.

>>59053612
C/C++ Embedded programmer here. I would like to see a more modern language like rust become ubiquitous on embedded systems. C/C++ are currently the standard for the systems that I work on and I often spend hours helping colleges debug memory/pointer issues because they are soo easy to make.

>/g/ hardcore C developers NEVER make mistakes
This is quite amazing, the ability to write FLAWLESS programs.
Why aren't you hired by defense contractors for $1,000,000 / year?

>>59053919
I don't get this.
The problem is the lack of \NUL terminator on str2?
Then why didn't he used:

printf("%s" , str2);

instead of:

    for (int i = 0; i < 40; ++i)
        printf("%c" , str2[i]);
        
    puts("");

To demonstrate his point about buffer overflows.

He purposely constructed an string without a NUL terminator
Then , knowing that , he wrote code to print STRINGS WITHOUT NUL TERMINATION.
¿?

>>59061370
They work for Russia.
Why do you think everyone is afraid of Russian hackers?

>>59053919
Because strncpy is noncompliant. Compliant C code uses snprintf instead, i.e. something like

snprintf(str2, sizeof(str2), "$*.s", 5, str1);

as that will properly nullterminate.

Existance of a broken library function like strncpy doesn't invalidate the language, try again though fag.

File: a2498b071d8b65febf12cc54a255e6b6.jpg (64KB, 736x682px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 736x682px

>>59061182
Webdevs can't into PHP though. They use JavaScript and nothing but JavaScript.

>>59061167
>HTML
>programming language

>>59054107
>retard-proofing is security
Fuck off pajeet

>>59061863
I want to see your program with >100000 LoC without any possible bugs that could be abused.

>>59061772
It's part of the language specification though. If the makers couldn't even design a proper solution for such a simple problem like string copying, how can you trust their entire programming language?

>>59061683
>>59061263
You two are morons, please stay away from any piece of code. Forever.

>>59061370
The entire point that C "programmers" don't seem to understand is that it is not just hard to write good C and it's not just a matter of being a good programmer/hiring good programmers. It's actually impossible to write good C and this has been proven empirically time and again.

>>59061863
Every other language is capable of that, why isn't C? You're the Pajeet here, it's not incompetent Indians advocating the end of C, it's security experts who exploit it for a living.

No one who's ever read this http://insecure.org/stf/smashstack.html kept using C for too long.

>>59061152
False. It's amazing how retarded ctards are that they can't understand such simple statements.

>>59061914
This. The pajeets aren't the ones denouncing what kind of crap C is. The pajeets are the ones defending this shit. Pajeets are known for defending the shit they make, no matter how bad it is.

File: 1466799123560.jpg (68KB, 461x588px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 461x588px

>>59053612
In most places where C is used nowadays, the only viable alternative is writing straight in assembly.

Rust has some neat ideas, but it's far from being performant enough yet to replace C. C++ has a lot of the same problems as C, plus too much bloat for serious embedded work. Go is nice, but it doesn't have the right abstractions (just imagine writing a device driver in it.)

It sucks, but C is basically the best we've got for embedded work right now, and it doesn't look like that's about to change.

File: 1463294246692.jpg (37KB, 449x546px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 449x546px

>>59062003
Performant is not a word

>>59053913
Basically because the DOD stopped requiring its use.

Only reason why you hate C is because you're shit at it you dumbfucks

>2011+6
>not programming in machine language
fuck pajeet libraries and pajeet compilers

>>59062103
There are plenty of valid arguments in this thread and yet you managed to avoid all of them and make a low-quality post.

Congratulations!

>>59062126
Higher quality than your code

PhDs who use C++ for high-performance computing openly admit to still now knowing everything about the language after using it for 20 years.
/g/ undergrad dropouts somehow know it all and just call it "clusterfuck"

>>59062103
>>59062148
No. I hate C precisely because I'm so good at it I can tell it's shit. I exploit it for a living, you dumbass.

>>59062148
xD

>>59062156
Sure you do kiddo

>>59062184
Enjoy your buffer overflows, pajit.

>>59058078
It's not unless you are retarded.

>>59062197
Pajeets don't use C because it's too hard for them. They use java like I bet you actually use.

>>59062215
Java is written in C, faggot.

>>59062226
It's still the java language and that's what talentless hacks like you use, pajeet.

>normal languages
>make a small mistake
>"array index out of bounds, my friend" ;)

>C "language"
>make a small mistake
>suddenly your program is vulnerable to hackers

C-tards will defend this.

>>59062014
I think it's createable, performant - which performs

>>59062266
If thinking I'm a java pajeet helps you sleep at night, then keep telling yourself that, my friend.

>>59062274
Any program with bugs will make yourself vulnerable to hackers, masterbating monkey

>>59062288
>Pajeet ran out of arguments
lel

>>59062274
/g/ hardcore coders write 1,000,000 LOC programs without a single mistake
Their git repositories often only contain 1 commit for the entire project.
This is why they make $500k/year.

File: 1487432164554.jpg (71KB, 359x391px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 359x391px

>>59062014
Neither are half the words we use in this industry, Pajeet. It's jargon. You'd understand if you got a software engineering job.

File: cringe.jpg (13KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 200x200px

>>59062292
The difference is: I forget to sanitize input in Java, I get funky stuff in my database but it's fine; I forget to sanitize input in C, hacker overwrites my stack's return address and gets full blown shell access.

>he's unironically defending it
Cringeworthy.

>>59062274
>he needs a programming language that holds his hand

When I write C I tend to do it precisely because of reasons like avoiding having to do bounds-checking on arrays. If I know that my code will always access an index within bounds then I don't want to do several hundred million checks on every time-step of my simulations - you'd be surprised at how much this slows things down.

>>59062274
>compilers are languages now

>>59062327
>If I know that my code will always access an index within bounds

>I know what I'm doing!

People with attitudes like yours are part of the reason why there are so many vulnerabilities.

>>59062306
Nice fantasy world you live in fag, but we presented you with arguments which you never refuted and you never came back with any argument besides "lel you're just bad at C stay mad le trole XDDDDD". Refer to this shitpost >>59062103

>>59062327
>b-but muh simulations
Just use R or Octave, pleb.

>>59062369
Using R or Octave for extremely computationally intensive simulations is braindead retarded. You will never get even close to a compiled language like C with either of those.

>>59062393
Don't repeat yourself, fag. Why would I go ahead and implement matrix multiplication or numerical integration by hand in C if other folks have already done an excellent job at it?

You gain seconds in performance but waste months in development and debugging.

Stay frustrated.

>>59062369
4TRAN

>>59062393
>compiled language
There is literally no such thing.

>>59062417
>but waste months in development and debugging.
Only if you're bad at C, which it seems you must be.

>>59062476
Funny how you guys always fallback to the "you're just bad at C" fallacy, conveniently ignoring that we are the ones showing you actual knowledge of C. It's almost as if you had no arguments...

>>59062509
Your lack of understanding as to why people still use C is evidence of your inability to program in the language.

>>59062552
>Your lack of understanding as to why people still use C
I am the one who lacks that understanding? Let's hear your explanation for it. Mine is right here >>59054390, and it's 100% correct.

>your inability to program in the language
I understand the language very well, that's precisely why I hate it. I work daily on finding flaws directly caused by the C language. You probably don't even know what a register or a frame pointer are.

Keep ad-homining, C-tard. Still waiting for those arguments...

>>59062393
>he's unironically suggesting you should reinvent the wheel
Smelly dumb C-programmer scum proving to be dumber by the minute.

>>59062592
>Mine is right here >>59054390, and it's 100% correct
>>59055015

>>59062319
Nobody in business uses 'performant' it's a word for kids and pajeets and changs.

just so you know.

File: TIOBE.png (183KB, 1703x851px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 1703x851px

>>59062707
>what is the TIOBE index?

>>59062720
The point is, C/C++ runs on the bare metal like ASM, that makes it fast. Nothing else out there can keep up. C/C++ will never be obsolete.

>>59062720
> t. Rajesh