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.

  • bleistift2@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    7 hours ago

    I don’t understand how this would happen. If the any type truly “propagates through the system”, that means you’re passing around a variable of which you say, “I don’t know what this is. You deal with it.” How can you do any meaningful operations on it when you don’t know the type?

    • ryannathans@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      You write your typescript code to expect a given type but at the end of the day it’s JavaScript with a type checking compiler so when “'any” gets in through a library or interface somewhere you just get a random “undefined” somewhere when you try to perform an operation with it because it’s just JavaScript at the end of the day

      • bleistift2@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 hours ago

        What you’re describing is not really an ‘any’ type in the code but garbage data. No language is going to save you if you read a file expecting a character but it’s actually an int.

        • marcos@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          30 minutes ago

          Think of it like Haskell’s cast from the Typeable class.

          Yes, if somebody sends random stuff, you’ll have to handle a failure, or do the equivalent of returning undefined, what is way easier than properly handling it in TS. What you do from there is up to you.