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

Programmer Humor

28076 readers
1295 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
[–] chatokun@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Maybe, but always remember LLMs are trained on real people. Some people naturally use similar styles to some LLM tica as it was stolen from them in the first place.

[–] Bazoogle@lemmy.world 0 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

If you see more than 3 EM dashes in a body of text, it's 100% AI. I have found random online articles where there is at least two em dashes every paragraph. No human wrote that shit. A human is lucky to get away with one em dash (and it's been that way before AI).

[–] andioop@programming.dev 1 points 40 minutes ago

one heartbroken anti-AI human who loves em dashes replying ☹️ we're split into two classes: the type who abandons our typing habits to avoid being told our human efforts are definitely AI, and the type who stubbornly carries on using em dashes