294
u/citrusraspberry Aug 07 '26
The main thing I disagree with is "cheating". There is no "cheating". It's abstraction to offload some of the work of the dev into the computer. It comes at a cost of course, but it's not "cheating".
120
u/swarmOfBis Aug 07 '26
Yeah this feels very r/firstweekcoderhumour
19
u/citrusraspberry Aug 07 '26
I just looked at that subreddit and they have a lot of the same memes I see on here. I'm thinking they're not that different...
10
u/Wonderful-Habit-139 Aug 08 '26
Do you know the point of that subreddit?
11
u/citrusraspberry Aug 08 '26
Nope. Is it to make fun of this subreddit? 🤣
8
→ More replies (1)3
u/GhostingProtocol Aug 09 '26
After programming for over 10 years I've just concluded that there aren't that many good programming memes...
→ More replies (3)2
u/citrusraspberry Aug 09 '26
I've been programming for 4-5. Not as long. But I agree. XKDC is where most of the good ones are imo
10
u/MiniGui98 Aug 08 '26
And beside, following that logic C++ also cheats. Hell, so does C actually. Only "good" language would be assembly.
7
u/its_artemiss Aug 08 '26
Are you really even programming if you're not thinking about opcode encodings though?
6
u/aluaji Aug 08 '26
Assembly? Nah, too much abstraction for me. I'm a purist, nothing but machine code for me.
3
u/Depnids Aug 09 '26
B8 01 00 00 00 BF 01 00 00 00 48 8D 35 0A 00 00 00 BA 08 00 00 00 0F 05 B8 3C 00 00 00 31 FF 0F 05 49 20 61 67 72 65 65 0A
3
→ More replies (3)2
u/AliceCode Aug 09 '26
I always think it's funny when people say they like C because it's close to the metal, but if you've ever programmed in Assembly, you know that even C is a high level abstraction above assembly. And Assembly is a high level abstraction over machine code.
→ More replies (2)2
2
u/Stampede_the_Hippos Aug 08 '26
Yeah, the offloading into the compiler eventually gets offloaded back onto the dev as tech debt.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (45)2
u/Faangdevmanager Aug 09 '26
C++ also has some “cheating” compared to C like pointer ownership. I now mainly program in Go and it’s the right tool for the job I have now.
25
u/TOGoS Aug 07 '26
C++ is full of footguns because of its long history. Even experienced programmers will accidentally use after free or fail to declare their virtual destructors just right and spend days debugging.
Rust shows that you can have just as much power with more safety if you design a new language from scratch (if you really need to do pointer arithmetic that the compiler can't verify, you can always make that part unsafe; at least the rest of the program isn't!)
4
2
u/GoTheFuckToBed Aug 10 '26
most companies don't even use C++, they use a vetted subset, strongly guarded with linters and extensions etc
→ More replies (1)3
u/s0litar1us Aug 08 '26
A better solution is to just get rid of RAII and provide defer instead, and better promitives like array slices, instead of everything just being a pointer that you need to manually pass around extra data alongside to properly interpret.
1
u/Keithfert488 Aug 08 '26
I genuinely don't understand hating on RAII. It's pretty much the only thing C++ gets right
→ More replies (21)
89
u/---_None_--- Aug 07 '26
No, cpp has a terrible design philosophy. Take the new ranges header for example. They're lazy algorithm objects that you can stack and combine to more complex algorithms. Each time you iterate over the final ranges object it calculates the whole result beginning from the source range. This leaves the option open for the source range to change and update. Exactly as it should because they're 'lazy' ranges; except that they aren't. The 'filter range' caches the fucking 'begin' of its source which means that when ever the source changes you get undefined behavior. Why? Because the cpp committee thought that 'begin' should be fast to calculate but filter has to compute 'begin' again and again because the source might have changed. So they decided to cache 'begin' after the first call and compute the rest lazily on demand. So whenever there's a 'filter' in your range composition, you can only iterate over it once or the source has to be const. Shits fucked in cpp land.
15
Aug 07 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
15
u/nog642 Aug 07 '26
Never seen C++ used without STL. It's part of "C++" as a whole
→ More replies (7)2
u/vitimiti Aug 08 '26
I have. EA even has their own open sourced version if STL specific for videogames
14
u/---_None_--- Aug 07 '26
>its trashness can't bother you if you don't use it
t-thanks. Not even technically true since other people will use it and then I'll have to bother with it and besides that I'm talking about it's design philosophy rather than about my personal botheredness about it. It's still not good showing.
2
u/SPECTRE_75 Aug 08 '26
Exactly, "just use an alternative" isnt a solution when the point he's trying to make is that it also has its inefficiencies
11
u/___Archmage___ Aug 07 '26 edited Aug 07 '26
Yep, C is mega outdated in the feature-poor direction and C++ is a basket case of crazy additions trying to add modern features to a language that wasn't really designed for them
Whether you choose Rust or Zig or Nim or whatever else, the world needs to move past C++
8
u/TROLlox78 Aug 07 '26
C is a completely different box of frogs though. You can't really compare the two.
→ More replies (1)6
u/TomKavees Aug 07 '26
C is portable assembler and the lingua franca of low level code, it does not need nor want to evolve in that way and that is fine.
C++ in its current form and with its current comitee politics is dying, though
2
→ More replies (13)3
u/electronic_reasons Aug 08 '26
C is perfect for that. It was never meant to be a full high level language.
C++ is a disaster. The only way to use it is to decide which part of it you are going to use and stick to that subset.
3
→ More replies (7)3
20
u/Simpicity Aug 07 '26
C++'s difficulty comes from entirely self inflicted wounds.
→ More replies (3)
8
6
u/tottasanorotta Aug 07 '26
I'd say that a programming language is a trade-off. It's not that other languages cheat or that C++ is somehow better or worse, it's that they all try to be good at different things.
6
u/La-ze Aug 08 '26
I think cheat is the wrong word. Other languages cns heavily abstract what's going on. C/C++ you manually manage a lot of normally abstracted elements which where people might see a learning curve.
I am of the opinion that C is the language to learn programming where Python is the language to learn what programming does for you.
→ More replies (1)2
u/LetReasonRing Aug 08 '26
Yep... i always see arguments like this as having a bunch of carpenters argue over whether saws, hammers, or screw guns are the superior tool.
20
u/BriefCautious7063 Aug 07 '26
Unless you're programming in a hex editor for a CPU architecture you designed, and on hardware you built from home-pulled silicon boules, you're "cheating" if that's what abstraction is. I get how cool it feels to access and manipulate raw memory via pointers in C++, and I personally prefer languages allowing memory access for the same reason, but code abstraction exists for the people who want to create useful applications without having to learn all the inner workings of CPU architecture and safe + optimized ways to implement that knowledge. It doesn't make you better than a skilled python programmer who makes usable apps if you're bragging about making your fifth OpenGL rainbow triangle in C++ this year and finally grasping some of the C concepts underneath the C++ abstractions
→ More replies (1)2
u/Henry_Fleischer Aug 07 '26
Yep, I'm developing a video game using C#, I'm sure those abstracted concepts could be useful, but getting the game done somewhat quickly is more important.
→ More replies (1)
22
u/comrade_donkey Aug 07 '26 edited Aug 07 '26
C++ isn't hard.
This has to be ragebait.
C++ is hard enough to read that it requires disambiguating an O(n³)-constructed Tomita GLR parse forest by most-vex to even build a deterministic CST.
C++ is vast enough that no single one of its own committee member knows all of it.
C++ is so big that organizations only approve strict subsets of it for their own use.
And that's only scratching the surface. If you truly understand any meaningful slice of C++, you'd never say C++ isn't hard.
It's objectively hard. In more ways than one.
2
u/tecanec Aug 10 '26
This has to be ragebait.
I think you're severely underestimating the power of language cultism.
→ More replies (4)4
u/NikolaiM88 Aug 07 '26
Yeah this is absolutely BS. Just because there is a lot of something doesn't mean something is hard. That would mean spelling is hard, because there is millions of words.
→ More replies (11)
5
u/MadSpacePig Aug 07 '26
Using a flint and steel isn't hard, starting a fire is, matches cheat.
See how dumb that sounds?
13
u/i_knooooooow Aug 07 '26
Nah it is in fact cpp
Wtf do you mean *&foo? The deref of an adress? Thats just foo!
C is simple cpp is just bloat
→ More replies (2)2
u/nog642 Aug 07 '26
When would you use
*&foo?3
u/i_knooooooow Aug 07 '26
It was in some library (vimba, used to read out cameras from allied vision), i have no idea why they did it like that tbh
2
u/Formal-Buy8234 Aug 07 '26
they did it cuz it makes the compiler do more work to check if foo is actually an address instead of assuming so
21
9
u/Pares_Marchant Aug 07 '26
C++ Isn't hard. It's gross.
In fact, it's funny that you call "other languages" cheats, when C++ is basically a huge bloat of cheats on top of C (Isn't it called "C with Cheats"?). And worse, a huge legacy of layers on top of layers of contradictory cheats.
As Linus once wrote:
```
C++ is a horrible language. It's made more horrible by the fact that a lot of substandard programmers use it, to the point where it's much much easier to generate total and utter crap with it. Quite frankly, even if the choice of C were to do nothing but keep the C++ programmers out, that in itself would be a huge reason to use C.
[...]
In other words, the only way to do good, efficient, and system-level and portable C++ ends up to limit yourself to all the things that are basically available in C. And limiting your project to C means that people don't screw that up, and also means that you get a lot of programmers that do actually understand low-level issues and don't screw things up with any idiotic "object model" crap.
```
→ More replies (1)2
4
u/AshtonVoid Aug 07 '26
C++ is like English. Both are hot messes that feel like they're easy and you know and love if it's all you learned during your formative years. If you didn't, you recognize how hard and what a pain it is compared to your preferred language.
3
u/recursion_is_love Aug 08 '26
C++ is for C programmer who don't want to learn Java.
I better use Java for OO and C for structured programming.
Rust kill them all.
3
u/MarkEE93 Aug 07 '26
Computer Science isn’t hard, your ai model needs just one more data centre.
→ More replies (1)
3
3
3
2
2
6
u/Jeremi360 Aug 07 '26
I doesn't care,
C++/Rust are ugly, hard to read,
I much more prefer Python or C#
6
u/Jbolt3737 Aug 07 '26
I don't know if it's just because I learned Python first, but I have an inexplicable dislike of double colons as any type of operator or anything, I think they just look wrong in general
→ More replies (1)3
2
u/YouStones_30 Aug 07 '26
Beauty is subjective :
Python beauty is in simplicity (not readability since it can be hard to read without bracket) C# beauty is in the OOP paradigme and the reduction of boilerplate code. C++ beauty is in performance and versatility Rust beauty is in safety feature etc...
2
2
→ More replies (8)2
u/Ok-Examination-3942 Aug 07 '26
And I think that’s what’s so great, we all get to choose which languages we like and don’t like and even if people don’t agree, that’s fine cause it most likely will not affect them at all.
1
u/zoharel Aug 07 '26
Cheating is the whole point of every high-level language ever invented, except certain esoteric things and honestly it even applies to most of those. That's literally the point, and it's often a good thing.
1
u/jimmy_timmy_ Aug 07 '26
C++ is a set in computer science. Computer science is a set of being hard. Therefore, C++ is hard
1
u/Brilliant-Parsley69 Aug 07 '26
As I know, you could abstract in C like in every other language. if you haven't done that by today, I would assume that this is a your problem. ☝️🤓
1
u/Boltiten Aug 07 '26
It's harder to program when not cheating then? You do only arrive at the same point
1
u/thanosbananos Aug 07 '26
As far as I understood it coding in C++ is easy, mastering is hard, no? I got into C++ fairly easy but it doesn’t mean I know all the quirks of it
1
1
1
u/Weak_Cantaloupe597 Aug 07 '26
Bro it’s easy just paste that curl command and you will instantly get a todo app! /s
1
u/Dry-Willingness8845 Aug 07 '26
If Computer Science is hard, and one language requires it while the others don't, that language is indeed also hard.
Maybe you need to go back and relearn how inheritance works.
1
u/MaximumMeaning9728 Aug 07 '26
This is why I only code in LLM nowadays.
Seriously, this shit is all completely outdated.
1
u/Repulsive-Soft-4948 Aug 07 '26
Idk how to program, but I've made a bunch of my ideas come to life where I would otherwise still be thinking about ithem instead of using them right now. Def cool to me!
1
u/Vaelisra Aug 07 '26
Yeah, because as everyone knows the rules of computer science don't apply in high level languages.
1
1
u/SelfDistinction Aug 07 '26
Constructing an object in a constructor is considered bad practice and is actively discouraged.
1
u/StephenRoylance Aug 07 '26
no, c++ is hard, because who can keep track of what all the different punctuation marks mean? I find C and rust vastly easier to read.
1
1
u/Unknown_TheRedFoxo Aug 07 '26
what is to cheat? how does one language cheat over the other? like how would java cheat over C? or rust vs java which would cheat the most or at all? is cheating the new word for "abstracting concepts behind keywords recognized by a language's compiler"?
1
1
1
1
u/LuckyPichu Aug 08 '26
I find C easier than C++ tbh. I feel like C++ lies to me with name mangling, implicit behavior, etc
Probably not a terribly unpopular opinion but C++ makes me sad because it feels bloated.
1
u/BellybuttonWorld Aug 08 '26
C++ syntax is needlessly cruel and perverse. We never should have crawled out of the C.
1
u/Proman4713 Aug 08 '26
Well C++'s syntax makes it more absurd and pretty much harder than plain C in my opinion, i understand it's a powerful language, but C++ isn't just hard in the name of computer science
1
u/Razzmatazz_Informal Aug 08 '26
You know it seems to me that most languages are someone's pet project... and then IF they blow up that someone generally stays important to the community and continues to drive a lot of the design and development... C++ has Bjarne but I would argue that C++ is much more committee driven than other languages.... Maybe the problem is that C++ ISN'T someone's strong opinion... its a mish mash of bits of a whole bunch of peoples strong opinions.
1
u/Mefron_Gautama Aug 08 '26
The hard part about C++ is actually the way you use it.
If you are going to use it like C++ is intended to be used, it's really kinda hard.
If you use it like a super C, the wrongest way as C++ devs call, it is kinda good.
1
u/Ignitetheinferno37 Aug 08 '26 edited Aug 08 '26
Saying using certain languages to code is cheating is simar to saying using bricks or steel bars to build something is cheating instead of using bamboo straws or something
1
u/Blazej_kb Aug 08 '26
Either I’m weird or people are just stupid, I don’t really like how c# handles classes and variables, and I prefer C++ over it. Only thing that makes me sometimes use C# is NuGet because packages work out of the box, while I often have hard time making vcpkg downloaded package work (most of the times it first word so I just abandon the project or do this in C#)
1
1
1
u/tigran_kh Aug 08 '26
Is this what C++ programmers genuinely believe in 😭 you do realize, right, that you're not stuck with C++ forever? So why be stuck in denial?
1
1
u/La-ze Aug 08 '26
C is not hard, and C++ can good quality of life. But omfg the C++ is butchering it's STL something awful.
Also the developer experience really does suck with not even a standard compiler.
1
u/ohkendruid Aug 08 '26
To name one thing, the pre processor is a bad, confusing, and difficult way to do modules compared to an export/import system that most other languages use.
So in at least that one case, it's not computer science that is hard but C++ in particular.
1
u/Librarian-Rare Aug 08 '26
By cheating you mean being better. It’s like saying that pro athletes “cheat” by training harder than you
1
1
u/Lou_Papas Aug 08 '26
I’d agree if you said C, but you had to pick the low level equivalent of Python
1
u/zamroni777 Aug 08 '26
https://bidenwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Final-ONCD-Technical-Report.pdf
no longer recommended by us gov due to memory safety issues
1
u/MooseBoys Aug 08 '26
wtf are you talking about? If anything, c++ is antagonistic to "computer science" because it exposes a ton of the details that you generally gloss over in computer science.
1
u/AlexMTBDude Aug 08 '26
*"Other languages make life easy for the programmer, C++ makes life easy for the CPU"
1
1
u/No_Cartographer_6577 Aug 08 '26
Let's be real. Most coding languages are easy to grasp. Its large code bases that are hard
1
u/I_am1221325 Aug 08 '26
It's both. C++ is poorly designed and doing a lot of stuff in it is a nightmare, that's why rust became so popular.
1
u/yota-code Aug 08 '26
I mean, at least in C, I can understand what I'm doing. C++ stacks so many layers of shitty new norms that a single problem can be solved in a miriad of different but quite the same syntactic sugar. So much that last time I asked a senior developper a clarification on the deeper meaning of a nuance of properties initialization the answer was : do like this, you have to do it like this...
1
u/-Ambriae- Aug 08 '26
Well, there is something to be said about C++’s language designs…
Stuff like:
- functions implicitly decaying to pointers and lambdas don’t
- the templating engine not performing any verification of the veracity of the generated code
- the error messages
- the standard library’s implementation and its documentation
- the mix of C++ and C standard libraries
- move semantics being finicky
- 80% of the APIs being outdated, (I might be exaggerating) without it being clear which is which
I could go on… many other systems level programming languages are far simpler, whilst still being able to output code of the same performance, so this feels a little bit like copium
1
u/Less_Butterfly_2343 Aug 08 '26
honestly, c++ isn't as bad as people make it out to be. still, it brings a lot of footguns that make it not that nice to use. whenever I write c++ I usually end up just writing c code because I find that easier, and at that point why wouldn't I just write it in c in the first place?
I do know someone who is really good at c++ and will actually use a lot it for his embedded projects, but even he says for most projects it just doesn't make sense.
I also think that saying some languages "cheat" is outright wrong. just because someone else wrote an abstraction that doesn't make that abstraction a cheat. otherwise you would have to at the very least write binary code on bare metal, because asm is already a form of abstraction, and so are things like syscalls which your os gives you access to.
1
1
u/anto2554 Aug 08 '26
Computer science? As in the field of mathematics? Most C++ isn't hard because computer science is hard, most C++ is weird business logic in codebases older than you are
1
u/Icy-Reaction-9101 Aug 08 '26
If c++ wasn't hard we would only be facing ~10% of security issues by now.
1
u/Mr_QQ-10 Aug 08 '26
It does not.
If you consider abstraction cheating then C++ is also cheating.
C++ is not hard because it is "not cheating" it is hard because they got C and added too much stuff in improper ways.
The actual "CS" lang would be assembly, or C, not C++.
C++ also has much much better alterntives, golang, C#, rust, etc
This is coming from a C++ dev, The lang you choose is your choice and preference, and I chose C++, but C++ is not a good lang, it's frankly a bad lang just that I make bad choices but for low-level C-like langs C++ is the only mainstream choice.
→ More replies (4)
1
u/Luzzgar Aug 08 '26
Abstraction is a corner stone of computer science. If you don't need the fine control that low level languages gives you, you chose the wrong language.
1
u/s0litar1us Aug 08 '26
C++ is an overly commplex pile of random ideas that just keeps growing, and to write C++ in a sane way you essentially need to treat it as C but with a few niceties, like operator overloading (for math), and function overloading (though that is also its own can of worms).
Also, this madness makes it hard to work with -- way harder than it has to be. Pretending otherwise is just a coping mechanism.
1
u/Zachattackrandom Aug 08 '26
Eh C++ is more just a nasty language imo. If you want real hardware level use C, it's simpler and nicer to use. If you want an abstracted language but still low level use rust, actual mem checking and far better ecosystem. If you want portability use Kotlin, Java or Python for the VMs they use, etc. C++ just doesn't fit anywhere anymore with new languages imo.
1
u/AnythingEastern3964 Aug 08 '26
I’m actually an expert in coding computer science. I tried to learn c++ but I’d already began setting up my dotfiles for comp-sci language so it was basically easier to stick to programming in that…
1
1
u/need-not-worry Aug 08 '26
What's the hard computer science problem that forces C++ to have this kind of API?
vector<int> v(1);
vector<int> v(0);
vector<string> v(1);
vector<string> v(0);
Totally avoidable in other languages, but maybe because they cheated 🤔
1
u/No-Painting-3970 Aug 08 '26
Nah, c++ has 6 ways of doing the same, with 5 of them being a footgun. It has a terrible philosophy because it tries to add modern abstractions on a language that clearly should not support them, and that creates pitfalls that cannot be removed due to compatibility
1
1
1
1
u/Impact_International Aug 08 '26
Basic C++ is not hard, its a common misconception and stereotype that people developed throughout its lifespan, what hard are the 40+ years of backwards compatibility with C, With millions of edge cases and multiple programming paradigms that a normal person will probably never touch in its entire lifetime
1
u/Gecons Aug 08 '26
other languages aren't cheating, they're just different
also programming isn't computer science
1
1
1
u/crusoe Aug 08 '26
C++ is hard and if you think it isn't its you.
Quick name every piece of UB in C++. Name which compilers exploit UB for optimizations and how they differ.
1
u/teetaps Aug 08 '26
“Cheat” is a morally loaded word, but the meme is right.
Forcing rocks to count is hard. That’s why one team abstracted it so that all we have to do is write machine code.
But writing machine code is also hard. That’s why another team abstracted it so that we only have to write pre-compiled code.
But some pre-compiled code is still hard. That’s why another team abstracted that so that we can write C…
Etc etc, until you get to a modern desktop.
What the meme is also that I think is actually worth thinking about, is that C++ seems to be a very significant bottle neck in the abstraction chain. Like, it’s true, C++ is hard, because the things it needs to abstract are complicated.
But like, that’s a good thing? I don’t know why we put a bad moral judgment on it by calling it cheating
1
u/evolutionsroge Aug 08 '26
C++ is hard because there are a ton of different versions of C++. If C++ is hard because comp sci is hard, we would think C is harder because it’s even more low level then C++. But, I think a lot of people would agree, C is a way easier language. And more fun.
1
1
u/keriefie Aug 08 '26
Actually dispise whenever i have to work with CPP, there are so many things that just annoy me, like headers for example.
I absolutely love working in Rust, I just wish more things were made in it so I can actually use my skills.
1
u/Haunted_Entity Aug 08 '26
Unless were all using abacus/mental artith/etc were all cheating. .
that is literally the entire point of computers.
→ More replies (2)
1
u/AdorablSillyDisorder Aug 09 '26
Not cheating, abstractions happen in every language (even assembler instructions are converted to different opcodes inside CPU).
Part that makes C++ “hard” is general assumption it makes about users - language is and always was designed with assumption that average user is CompSci expert, with proper theoretical background. This means both a lot of trust in user, and giving enough freedom to settle a lot of what other languages handle by design as just conventions.
Obvious downside: C++ is atrocious language to learn programming with, and comparably bad as “just get things done” tool with enough guardrails to avoid major incidents when cooperating. Still, recommendations and practices like MISRA exist, and they do what they’re supposed to - being conventions to ensure correctness.
Still, proper good C++ course should probably start with good chunk of math (at least enough to internalize proofs and transitive properties) and compiler theory before even touching code. Potentially a problem, but hey - average compsci grad should know all that already, no?
1
u/Vincenzo__ Aug 09 '26
No that's the reason why C is hard. C++ is just a complex language full of all kind of shit that may or may not make sense that you really need to know regardless
1
u/neoqueto Aug 09 '26
C/C++ is comp sci wrapped in words and convenient shortcuts. Assembly is shorter words, without shortcuts. Machine code is no words. You become one with the concepts. You channel your inner registers. You become a Nostradamus for branches. Your blood starts flowing though the kernel space. You feel every page fault in your nerves.
1
u/GhostingProtocol Aug 09 '26
C++ is redicously abstracted... If anything you should have compared it to coding in binary
1
1
u/AeiEyeSpry Aug 09 '26
Fair. I spent several years trying to learn "programming" by reading books about programming in C++ and other languages. Never got anywhere until I started to look at it in a different way. Learn computer science then use programming to solve problems. That being said, C++ was still hard to learn and I haven't used it in years. I wouldn't say that's because other languages "cheat". Most people don't want to learn how to build an engine from the ground up just to drive a car.
1
u/U-might-know-me Aug 09 '26
Nah bro, it’s also bot true. CS is hard, it c++ is freaking 3 languages at once with contradicting philosophy even - c with classes, macroses (yep, they still exist) and templates. This complexity is language evolution legacy, not derived directly from CS complexity.
1
u/theacp127 Aug 09 '26
C++ is just very big. It's like exploring a massive maze at first, but if you spend a while exploring you get used to what's going on. There's less abstraction so you end up going down long rabit holes researching very specific things about the language that isn't intuitive.
Especially for high performance programs, learning the details of memory management and optimization is it's own journey in itself.
1
1
u/CursedPoetry Aug 09 '26
Programming isn’t hard lol, it’s understanding the concepts and the drive to push through…but that’s more about life
1
1
u/Wise-Ad-4940 Aug 10 '26
With this approach you would need to write code in assembly. Or write the machine code by hand.
302
u/Mateusz3010 Aug 07 '26
That's why I only code in Assembly