550

Pointers explained: (lemmy.world)

submitted 1 week ago by ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world to c/programmer_humor@programming.dev

77 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

So, googling it, the general premise is you should use smart pointers instead to avoid crashes. Got it.

[-] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago

Uh

I think I'll just let the cat drive instead

[-] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

They all have footguns that cause different crashes.

If you want to do explicit memory access without inevitable safety problems, you need Rust. That's the whole hype with Rust.

[-] MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

But... per-process-isolation is a hardware feature, no?

[-] psud@aussie.zone 2 points 2 days ago

So you really should implement it in your compiler so you don't contravene it

[-] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Sure, that may be (it's definitely not in userspace). But don't forget it works by crashing your program.

[-] DahGangalang@infosec.pub 10 points 1 week ago

Smart pointers implies C++, which is not the right answer.

[-] MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 6 points 1 week ago

Unlike many other programming languages, which are often picked up on the go from tutorials found on the Internet, few are able to quickly pick up C++ without studying a well-written C++ book. It is way too big and complex for doing this. In fact, it is so big and complex, that there are very many very bad C++ books out there. And we are not talking about bad style, but things like sporting glaringly obvious factual errors and promoting abysmally bad programming styles.

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/388242/the-definitive-c-book-guide-and-list