More like Python / JS devs
C devs are the few I've met that seem to actually care.
C devs are the few I've met that seem to actually care.
Linux lucked out, when you're doing tricky wait free concurrent algorithms that intrusive linked list you hand designed was a good choice. But over in userland you'll find another hand rolled list in somebody's single threaded file parser and oh, the growable array would be fifty times faster, shame the C programmer doesn't have one in their toolbox.
It makes sense to use a tech stack that lowers the cost on the developer side in the same way that it makes sense to make junk food. Why produce good, tasty food when there is more money do be made by just selling cheap stuff, it does the most important thing: give people calories without poisoning them (short term).
Get rid of those dumb decisions and it could have been pure JS and be 100% fine. C has no value here. The slow performance of JS is not harmful here. Discord is fast enough although it's Electron. VS Code is also fast enough.
But I'd also like to respond to the food analogy, since it's funny.
Let's say that going full untyped scripting language would be the fast food. You get things fast, it does the job, but is unhealthy. You can write only so much bash before throwing up.
Developing in C is like cooking for those equally dumb expensive unsustainable restaurants which give you "an experience" instead of a full healthy meal. Sure, the result uses the best ingredients, it's incredibly tasty but there's way too little food for too much cost. It's bad for the economy (the money should've been spent elsewhere), bad for the customer (same thing about money + he's going to be hungry!) and bad for the cook (if he chose a different job, he'd contribute to the society in better ways!) :D
Just go for something in the middle. Eat some C# or something.
Essentially you’re telling me that the software being made is not useful to many people; because the cost of writing the software (a handful of developers) will spend more time writing the software than their userbase will in executing their software.
Otherwise you’re inflicting something on humanity.
Dumping toxic waste in a river is much cheaper than properly disposing of it too; yet we understand that we are causing harm to the environment and litigate people who do that.
Slow software is fine in low volumes (think: shitting in the woods) but dumping it on huge numbers of users by default is honestly ridiculous (Teams, I’m looking at you: with your expectation to run always and on everyones machine!)
This is an example of not caring about the software per se, but only about the outcome.
> [C is] in fact it's famously bug-friendly
Yes, but as a user I like that. I have a game that from the user-experience seams to have tons of use-after-free bugs. You see that as a user, as strings shown in the UI suddenly turn to garbage and then change very fast. Even with such fatal bugs, the program continues to work, which I like as a user, since I just want to play the game, I don't care if the program is correct. When I want to get rid of these garbage text, I simply close the in-game window and reopen it and everything is fine.
On the other side there are games written in Pascal or Java, which might not have that much bugs, but every single null pointer exception is fatal. This led to me not playing the games anymore, because being good and then having the program crash is so frustrating. I rather have it running a bit longer with silent corruption.
C won't help with any of that. Unless the cost of development using it will scare away management which requests those dumb features. Fair enough then :)
Your example is not one of a 'dumb' design, it is a deliberate 'dark pattern' --> pushing you to use OneDrive as much as possible so that to earn more money.
ROTFL. Is there any security audit ? /s
it does the job - mostly.