Stop Doing Memory Safety

STOP DOING MEMORY SAFETY • BUFFER OVERFLOWS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE POSSIBLE • YEARS OF COMPILER RESEARCH yet NO REAL-WORLD USE FOUND for ACTUAL TYPE SAFETY • Wanted to PASS A VALUE WITHOUT HASSEL? We had a tool for that: It was called VOID* • “Yes please give me A SLICE of something. Please give me NO OVERFLOWS with it” - Statements dreamed up by evil wizards LOOK at what PL RESEARCHERS have been demanding your Respect for all this time, with all the COMPUTERS & MEMORY we built for them (This is REAL programming, done by REAL C++ SEDES): FN SAFE_ADD(A: U32, B: U32) -> U64 ????? ??????? ?????????????? “Hello I would like U64 apples please” They have played us for absolute fools

Мем высмеивает чрезмерно сложные типобезопасные конструкции и исследователей языков программирования: после длинного саркастического объяснения предлагается функция сложения, которая принимает 32-битные числа и возвращает 64-битное, а затем нелепо заказывает «U64 apples». Шутка в том, что такая «безопасность памяти» якобы мешает простым операциям и превращает очевидную задачу в абсурд. EN: The meme mocks overly complicated type-safe programming constructs and programming-language researchers: after a long sarcastic explanation, it presents an addition function that accepts 32-bit numbers and returns a 64-bit value, followed by the absurd request for “U64 apples.” The joke is that this kind of “memory safety” supposedly obstructs simple operations and turns an obvious task into absurdity.

• @ithueti / 4387 2021-07-20
• @right_wing_dev_squads / 4612 2022-08-07