I Hate Memory Safe Low Level Languages

The C++ programmer's 3 AM nightmare in full display. First the Rust evangelists tell you your beloved language is "unsafe" and you need to switch. Then they warn that all your code will be rewritten in Rust anyway, so prepare for unemployment. Finally, the dream escalates to its horrifying conclusion: "QUIT HAVING FUN" – because how dare you enjoy your pointer arithmetic and manual memory management? It's the programming equivalent of vegans telling meat-eaters they'll die of heart disease while you're just trying to enjoy your steak. Meanwhile, the C++ dev lies awake, haunted by the thought that maybe – just maybe – they should learn Rust before their GitHub contributions become vintage artifacts in the Computer History Museum.

The linguistic anthropology of programming languages we never asked for but desperately needed. C as Latin? Spot on—ancient, foundational, and nobody actually uses it conversationally anymore. The C++ as French comparison is *chef's kiss*. Needlessly complex rules that somehow make you feel inferior for not mastering them? Oui, c'est vrai. JavaScript as English hits too close to home—everyone cobbles together enough to get by, nobody follows the rules, and it somehow powers the entire world despite being a complete mess. And that Python burn... created to be easy but its users "could benefit from a shower once in a while." I've been in enough Python conferences to confirm this isn't entirely fiction. The Rust/Russian comparison might be the most accurate—passionate evangelists absolutely convinced their way is the only path to salvation. Memory safety or gulag, comrade!

Someone just confused Apple's language translation feature with programming language transpilation, and I'm dying! 😂 Imagine thinking your AirPods could convert Python code to Rust syntax while you're talking. What's next? Asking your coffee maker to refactor your legacy code while brewing your morning cup? If only programming were that simple! We'd all just whisper our requirements to our earbuds and get perfectly optimized, memory-safe code in return. Dream on, sweet summer developer.

Ah, the dependency economy strikes again! Nothing says "Make JavaScript Great Again" like slapping tariffs on all your package managers. 67% on NPM? That's how you end up with node_modules the size of Wyoming but still missing that one critical dependency. And Cargo at 90%? Rust developers about to start smuggling crates across the border. Meanwhile, Homebrew at just 14% is clearly the "very fine package manager on both sides." The only thing growing faster than these tariffs is your package-lock.json file.

One brave Rust enthusiast standing alone against the massive horde of C and C++ programmers, boldly declaring "Yes, you all are wrong." It's basically the programming language equivalent of bringing a memory-safe knife to a buffer overflow gunfight. The audacity! The sheer confidence of that one Rust dev thinking their fancy ownership model and zero-cost abstractions will convince thousands of battle-hardened pointer-arithmetic veterans who've been manually managing memory since before Rust was a speck of oxidation on Graydon Hoare's keyboard.

C++ developers watching Rust evangelists talk about memory safety is the programming equivalent of a wolf staring down a chihuahua. Sure, the chihuahua is making valid points about not eating the neighbors, but the wolf's been managing just fine with raw power and sharp teeth for decades, thank you very much. After 35 years of manual memory management, we've seen some things. And yeah, maybe we've caused a few segfaults that took down production servers at 2AM, but that's just character building.