this post was submitted on 28 Dec 2025
387 points (95.5% liked)

Programmer Humor

28105 readers
1810 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] bleistift2@sopuli.xyz 54 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (18 children)

I agree with the post. Setting up typescript takes an hour or two if you have no clue what you’re doing. In return you get the absence of (the equivalent of) null pointer exceptions.

I chuckle every time I find an NPE in the Java backend. Doesn’t happen to me. Can’t happen to me.

Sidenote, while I’m already gloating: Once the backend code had an error where they were comparing two different kinds of IDs (think, user ID and SSN), which gave wrong results. This error can’t happen to me either, because I type my IDs such that they are not comparable. A strong type system really is a godsend.

[–] glorkon@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (11 children)

NPEs are the reason why my team moved to Kotlin. Well, that and all the other myriad advantages Kotlin brings to the table.

[–] carrylex@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (3 children)

I like the "advantage" that using any Kotlin code in normal Java automatically forces you to use the kotlin-stdlib for Java 8 and adds a additional bloat of 10MB to your project...

[–] glorkon@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

Well, ideally you start new projects writing 100% Kotlin while only adding Kotlin code to older codebases you can't get rid of. Personally, I don't like mixing languages anyway and I would stay with Java in Java projects. One reason is the bloat argument you pointed out quite correctly.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (15 replies)