4 ms·

Specifically- it appears to be mostly C99, lots of macros, lots of ugly buffer manipulation. But it's tooled for PREFast so you know it's secure! (https://githu

Specifically- it appears to be mostly C99, lots of macros, lots of ugly buffer manipulation. But it's tooled for PREFast so you know it's secure! (https://github.com/microsoft/omi/blob/4ce2cf1cb0aa656b8eb934c5acc3f4d6a6796bfa/Unix/protocol/protocol.c#L193 https://github.com/microsoft/omi/blob/4ce2cf1cb0aa656b8eb934...) (j/k... I haven't seen that in ages). Guessing a port of MS's internal WMI codebase? This codebase just smells of rot all over.

pjmlp 5y ago
That is why there is "Modern C", "Modern C++" as talked at conferences, blog posts and endless over here, and then real life code that we actually find out in production.
- silon42 5y ago
  So the choice is RIIR or RIIC++ ?
  - pjmlp 5y ago
    It can also be RIIC#, RIID, RIIGo, RIIAda, RIIJava,... take your pick.
- int_19h 5y ago
  I've seen and written plenty of modern (at the time of writing) C++ in production. It really depends on the team and the product.
  - pjmlp 5y ago
    Sure, yet this is the outcome from companies deeply involved in ISO, let alone those where regular folks don't even care HN exists.
    - int_19h 5y ago
      Ironically, most modern C++ code I wrote was not for Microsoft, but a much smaller company that is not in any way involved in ISO C++ standardization process. It was due to that company culture - senior engineering leadership (which were also the founders) were all big standard C++ fans, and they wrote much of the original codebase. Large companies like MS often have codebases that are so ancient (e.g. HRESULTs and IF_ERR_GOTO type macros everywhere), they only get modernized very gradually if at all.
      - pjmlp 5y ago
        I only use C++ for libraries that are then plugged into managed runtimes. Most of the stuff I see in the wild could be considered what I call C+, basically MFC style with plenty of C love. While Microsoft has the excuse for older code bases, stuff like WRL and C++/WinRT also has its share of not only following what is preached regarding C++ Core Guidelines love.

pjmlp 5y ago

That is why there is "Modern C", "Modern C++" as talked at conferences, blog posts and endless over here, and then real life code that we actually find out in production.

silon42 5y ago
So the choice is RIIR or RIIC++ ?
- pjmlp 5y ago
  It can also be RIIC#, RIID, RIIGo, RIIAda, RIIJava,... take your pick.
int_19h 5y ago
I've seen and written plenty of modern (at the time of writing) C++ in production. It really depends on the team and the product.
- pjmlp 5y ago
  Sure, yet this is the outcome from companies deeply involved in ISO, let alone those where regular folks don't even care HN exists.
  - int_19h 5y ago
    Ironically, most modern C++ code I wrote was not for Microsoft, but a much smaller company that is not in any way involved in ISO C++ standardization process. It was due to that company culture - senior engineering leadership (which were also the founders) were all big standard C++ fans, and they wrote much of the original codebase. Large companies like MS often have codebases that are so ancient (e.g. HRESULTs and IF_ERR_GOTO type macros everywhere), they only get modernized very gradually if at all.
    - pjmlp 5y ago
      I only use C++ for libraries that are then plugged into managed runtimes. Most of the stuff I see in the wild could be considered what I call C+, basically MFC style with plenty of C love. While Microsoft has the excuse for older code bases, stuff like WRL and C++/WinRT also has its share of not only following what is preached regarding C++ Core Guidelines love.