← Back to context

Comment by hypeatei

7 hours ago

I think these threads attract people that write code for performance-critical use cases which explains the "cosmic horror" over pretty benign things. I agree though: most programs aren't going to be brought to their knees over some GC sweeps every so often.

I think these threads attract people like that, but also people that want to be like that. I've seen a lot of people do "rigor theater", where things like reproduce-able builds, garbage collection, or, frankly, memory safety are just thought terminating cliches.

Outside of hobbyist things, performance-critical code is the only responsible use case for a non-memory safe language like C in 2025, so of course it does. (Even that window is rapidly closing, though; languages like Rust and Swift can be better than C for perf-critical things because of the immutability guarantees.)

  • > Outside of hobbyist things, performance-critical code is the only responsible use case for a non-memory safe language like C in 2025, so of course it does.

    Maybe; I sometimes write non-hobbyist non-performance-critical code in C.

    I'm actually planning a new product for 2026 that might be done in C (the current iteration of that product line is in Go, the previous iteration was in Python).

    I've few qualms about writing the server in C.

  • I keep hearing this, but I fail to see why "the massive, well-maintained set of critical libraries upon which UNIX is based" is not a good reason to use C in 2025.

    I have never seen a language with a better ffi into C than C.