Can poettering be any more of a cunt?

>dev drama

have sex

He's right

Attached: Screenshot from 2019-01-08 21-07-47.png (1926x906, 188K)

Would you rather use screwdriver to hammer nails?
Somebody post the damn StopUsingC-sjw.png

>unironically quoting a circlejerk r*ddit post
wew lad

Attached: puffy_apu.png (858x534, 82K)

You lack reading comprehension.

point still stands

Finally, will red shit go out and build it own systemd os and leave Linux alone?

I agree with him completely. C is shit. C is utter shit. C, by itself, is responsible for more security issues in computer than all other reasons combined.

this "red shit" kept Linux alive, you know what Linux would look like without them? Go use shitbsd for a week. Fuck off.

>implying high level languages are appropriate for system programming

Attached: 1iji.jpg (1920x1500, 156K)

This dude has worked hard to get his promotion in the closed source software world... now when can we get rid of the systemDick shitstain and call it a day?

We are already using OSes written in a high level language.

>most popular language
>responsible for most issues
And you don't see any correlation

>buahahahaaaaaaa that meanie poettering insulted c!!! mom!!!

OpenBSD is really nice, and getting better. It's pretty usable as a server since VMM is a thing too.

You *do* realize C was always shit for security from the start, right?
Concepts such as null references have been admitted by Hoare himself to have been gross mistakes. Not to mention buffer overflows.

web devs, ladies and gentlemen

Using Glorious Gentoo without Poetteringware here, no idea what you're talking about.

what other system level programming lang. do you recommend? (genuinely asking)

related:
youtube.com/watch?v=eH5JgMlNE8o

I know this is bait but I'll bite:

People who think this shit in real life are insufferable faggots who have 0 concept of how much abstraction there already is between them programming in "real" languages bare metal. The amount of abstraction that's achieved by going from logic gates to C is fucking astronomical, and you could probably never achieve writing a C compiler from bare metal in your entire life if it weren't for the work of hundreds of years of mathematicians working all this shit out for you. Comparatively, the jump from C to Python is minuscule in the grand scheme of things. Sure it might abstract away a few data structures and make things nicer to use, but it's nothing compared to carefully organizing bits of sand together in such a way that they perform actual computation.

Computer science and abstraction are tied together at the hip. Losers who can't understand that the continuous abstraction of mathematics is the very essence of computing are the most obnoxious fucking faggots in the world. The losers who can't understand that it's actually harder to think abstractly are the funniest of them all. Sure you can do the equivalent of hand-holding a modern abacus. You're not accomplishing anything by reinventing the wheel for the thousandth time, you're just doing it because someone needs some retarded shit to be fast, but you're not furthering the field of computer-science. You're not developing new fucking algorithms in C, you're implementing something that someone (far smarter than you) has already thought of in a slightly different flavor just so you can get a paycheck.

Last time I used OpenBSD there was no support for my realtek wifi, no support for bluetooth, ryzen support didn't exist and forget about polaris. Garbage didn't even support TRIM. OpenBSD is for clueless wankers, the devs themselves use MacOS on their primary machine.

>c is a low level language

The kernel you are using has redhat codes in it, retarded mongrel. Furthermore, but for redhat no more freedesktop, gvfs, gio, gstreamer, gtk and gdk for you. Fucking clueless retard.

select * from posters where brain is null

Attached: c.webm (444x250, 1.88M)

>Using OpenBSD as a daily driver
lol

You can't sit here and neglect years of analysis and progress.
C has the potential to be good in the right hands with the right tools.
Keyword here, potential.
Humans make mistakes and the best thing you can do is mitigate it. Luckily we have the means today.
Regardless of if Rust is a good example here, in principle things like it should be the answer.
Safety that you pay for at compile time, in a STANDARD fashion.

People complain about languages like Go because they're easy and safe, as if that makes any sense. I will see the argument about memory and cpu usage, but I will not see a problem with a language being "too easy" or "too paranoid". Forcing you to deal with EVERY error by default is a good practice.

The way Rust handles and at least tries to enforce memory saftey is not bad either and comes at even less of a resource cost.

Why wouldn't you want something even marginally more secure by default, taking even less responsibility out of the programmers hands.

Improving the compilers and static analysis tools is where attention should be directed.
It's much, much more sensible than assuming people are going to perfectly implement anything ever.

C makes sense if you absolutely need to utilize the hardware to the max and hope for the best.
I'd much rather pay the cost of some cycles with the guarantees that it affords today. It's not like Java is the only "safe" language we have anymore.

Why are Red Hat employees getting so asshurt?

Know your place, NEET.
OpenBSD is good for nothing, not even routers.

Great argument you got there, pal.

>implying i use any of that

no, obsd devs dogfood. its freebad people who use macos. trim is usually handled at the hw level, bluetooth doesnt exist in obsd.

>maximum sweetie
You can go from NAND gates to Tetris in two courses on Coursera

>if you don't suck my employer's dick you're a neet
Excellent logic here. Diversity hire, I suppose?

oh? your don't use gio and gstreamer? LOL
No freedesktop? hahahah does your desktop usage consists entirely of ricing i3 and watching anime? LOL
Let's see your web browser and office suite.

>Used null
>everything worked perfectly
Need any burn cream?

>if you don't suck my employer's dick you're a neet
You are a NEET because you are a clueless contrarian mongrel who has absolutely 0 clue on how things work. No one would ever bother hiring retards like you.

most of that is either shit or going downhill very very fast

>I don't use the kernel, who needs that bloat anyway xD

Unironically, Go.
Or maybe Rust.

I'm not clicking that gay shit. Fuck you OP

hahah Let's see YOUR alternative to those, I won't even wait.

>systems programming
>golang
go is not well suited nor designed for that

nand2tetris is an incredibly watered down version of what a modern, general purpose architecture is actually supposed to do, not to mention that many important details are omitted.
Are you going to deny that the jump from logic gates to C is smaller than the jump from C to Python?

I use Windows since I have better things to do than bow to Red Hat.

the main goal should be that the vast bulk of kernel functionality be provided by *managed code* with only the bare minimum to init and setup the code management and memory management aspects being left unmanaged

The problem is that, even today, C has no true drop-in replacement. Theres still zero other languages that
>permit low-level bit twiddling and pointer manipulation
>don't force an obtrusive runtime system that complicates or prevents porting to all standard architectures
>are stable enough that you know you won't have to rewrite stuff when the next lang standard is released
I guess you could throw C++ in the mix but C++ doesn't solve any problems with C, and instead solves problems that never existed while introducing problems of its own.
The more I watch Rust, the less faith I have in it. Its cross-toolchains still throw cryptic linker errors for seemingly no reason, documentation is nonexistent and so-called "standards" keep changing. It's sad, because I think Rust has a ton of amazing ideas.
Ada is safe, but there are things that it doesn't permit that are absolutely required for OS/firmware development, and C provides many of those things. Its emphasis on its standard library for containers makes it more difficult to port, as well.

I already know how diversity hires work, stop sperging.

So why the fuck are you in this thread, mongrel? The argument is about redhat and it's importance in Linux. Get the fuck out.

>Ada is safe, but there are things that it doesn't permit that are absolutely required for OS/firmware development
such as?

Your argument was destroyed
Keep your strawman as a consolation prize

Why are you trying to use it as a desktop lol? I have it on top of slackware for a specific use case as a server. I've been considering replacing slackware as the base with openbsd and running a slackware install on top for other things, then another openbsd for another use on top of itself, but it's gonna be a lot of effort to make that change and I want to wait until virtualization is a bit more mature.

It's pretty solid. The only big pita is the upgrades, but it's not too bad if you're not a bitch and keep up with things.

if !argument
parrot("muh diversity hire".gen_variant());

Attached: 1542680170320.jpg (636x773, 32K)

I'm in this thread since it's a C wank thread in disguise.

>simplicity is bad
>just throw useless abstractions
>just add more complexity to fuck up debug
>muh "idiomatic" c++
Kill yourself, faggot.

>lel you lost already i don't have to answer
Thanks for proving your retardation.

Technically yes because of the ridiculous manpower there is that is mostly wasted on circumventing language flaws in e.g. C.
But nobody will ever commit to this so in practice, no.
As for alternatives, there are things like ATS that exist, can ensure safety, are significantly higher level and thus require significantly less code to express the same concept (which means fewer possible security flaws and easier to read/write/audit), and yet retain exact or higher-than C speed.
They all have their own flaws though, but it proves that C isn't the optimal language even for the only thing it's used for: speed.

You literally sound like the kind of guy that post was making fun of.

Wincucks have no say in C, did microtrash implement a C99 compatible compiler yet? lol forget about C11.

its less about alternatives, and more about how over time RH have been fucking them. Take GTK for instance. Despite it being an integral part of linux land, RH have been twisting and bending it into their toolkit for gnome, killing it in the process

Attached: 1537771566378.png (1200x1400, 502K)

he's not a cunt at all, he understands how messy C is because he spent years and years developing in it not a NEET like you

Attached: file.png (510x325, 40K)

This pic never gets old.

>Technically yes because of the ridiculous manpower there is that is mostly wasted on circumventing language flaws in e.g. C.
Never heard of valgrind, the post

I'm not him, but are you a diversity hire?.
Also,
>NPC meme
you better understand that meme before using it. It doesn't apply to people whose views are condemned by mass media and the political establishment.

The mere existence of valgrind proves how shit C is for security.

>C has the potential to be good in the right hands with the right tools.
I actually don't think this is true for any definition of potential and good that is not so broad as to apply to literally everything. I think anyone who considers C today should instead consider the likes of forth or pseudo-ASM (i.e. portable ASM like nasm) with extensive macros. It maps better to hardware, can extract higher speed in good hands, is significantly less likely to result in buggy code in my experience (and thus again, in the right hands), and really isn't anywhere near as hard as some people (who've probably never written significant amount of code in these languages) claim.

He is likely a Red Hat shill or a NEET who is projecting.

stop arguing with these retards, C is responsible for much more crisis than investment banking itself

I don't have an opinion on whether C is good or bad, but I'm simply gonna say anyone who thinks RAII isn't a necessity in safety-critical software is an abortion surviver that should be put out of its misery right now.

Attached: janny stickyholder.jpg (771x693, 67K)

>static code analysis tools prove your language sucks
So build static code analysis right into your compiler? I don't get it.

>valgrind
>static code analysis
Do you even have an idea what you're talking about?

I don't use C
Educate me

Well,he certainly isn't going to find anything intelligent or quotable here.

Valgrind doesn't look at the uncompiled code. It runs the program in a VM and keeps track of all mallocs/frees and pointers to the allocated memory at runtime. It may work with or without the -g flag (but not using -g when debugging is retarded).

t. never used valgrind in his life
If you did you'd know that it breaks down in a metric fuckloads of use cases. Again with trying to put bandaids on the ship's hole when it's taking water.

Valgrind is a tool mainly used for debugging memory allocation issues, such as memory leaks.
To do so, it needs to actually run the program and check whenever memory is allocated/deallocated. It's anything but static.
"Static" analysis would mean merely inspecting the source code, data, etc. BEFORE the program is ever executed.

>The problem is that, even today, C has no true drop-in replacement.
C isn't meant to have a drop-in replacement, because C is meant to be "portable assembly".

so long as CPUs are architected the way they are, assembly will always be a thing which means C will always be a thing, so the only solution is to git gud and avoid niggers are poettering

Oh, sounds like valgrind is more like auto adding invisible asserts everywhere

oh god

Except C is so far from portable assembly that even back in the days it was a mostly abstract description. Nowadays it doesn't even remotely hold.

Nothing is perfect, but
clearly exaggerated the amount of effort required to make C programs work
If C was so bad, it would have failed before now
Talking shit about it isn't going to make your pet language more popular
It's only going to make people more familiar with C
For example,
You see, not only is the "better" language you have in mind the loser, but it loses more when you attack the winners
All of this is going waaay over your head, I'm sure tho

Oh no, another one has gone cnile!

If I want fast code that uses minimal resources, what language should I use?

He's not wrong though.
>it doesn't look like C and is smart enough to handle memory for me, but without a GC, means its not a systems language
Stupid frogposter

Ada is not what you say it is.

If you want maximum performance, but not necessarily safety, C++ or Fortran are your best bet, depending on your use case.

ATS, C++, Forth, or ASM.

Someone wrote a kernel in Go. Its performance in nginx benchmarks is 5-15% behind Linux. I think that's pretty good.

usenix.org/system/files/osdi18-cutler.pdf