Post:

If you’re still shipping load‑bearing code in C, C++, Python, or vanilla JavaScript in 2025, you’re gambling with house money and calling it “experience.”

As systems scale, untyped or foot‑gun‑heavy languages don’t just get harder to work with—they hit a complexity cliff. Every new feature is another chance for a runtime type error or a memory bug to land in prod. Now layer LLM‑generated glue code on top of that. More code, more surface area, less anyone truly understands. In that world, “we’ll catch it in tests” is wishful thinking, not a strategy.

We don’t live in 1998 anymore. We have languages that:

  • Make whole classes of bugs unrepresentable (Rust, TypeScript)
  • Give you memory safety and concurrency sanity by default (Rust, Go)
  • Provide static structure that both humans and LLMs can lean on as guardrails, not red tape

At this point, choosing C/C++ for safety‑critical paths, or dynamic languages for the core of a large system, isn’t just “old school.” It’s negligence with better marketing.

Use Rust, Go, or TypeScript for anything that actually matters. Use Python/JS at the edges, for scripts and prototypes.

For production, load‑bearing paths in 2025 and beyond, anything else is you saying, out loud:

“I’m okay with avoidable runtime failures and undefined behavior in my critical systems.”

Are you?

Comment:

Nonsense. If your code has reached the point of unmaintainable complexity, then blame the author, not the language.

  • jonathan7luke@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    83
    ·
    14 hours ago

    I’m not even going to bother commenting on that train wreck of a post, but I just wanted to mention that I hate the writing style of programming-related LinkedIn posts. They’re just chock-full of sweeping generalizations presented as absolute truth in an extremely patronizing tone.

    Why can’t people just say, “In my opinion, X technology is a better fit for Y situation for Z reason,” instead of “Every time you encounter X, you must do Y, otherwise you’re dead wrong.”

    It’s just simultaneously so arrogant and also aggressively ignorant. If someone spoke to me like that in real life, I would never want to speak with them again. And these people are broadcasting this shit to their entire professional network.

    • Ephera@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Yeah, particularly the broadcasting really irks me.
      That is an opinion you can hold for yourself and then make compromises as you encounter reality. I do expect programmers to hold strong opinions.

      But when you broadcast it, you strip yourself of the option to make compromises. You’re just saying something which is going to be wrong in one way or another in most situations. I do expect programmers to be smarter than that.