Article by Ayman Alheraki in March 17 2025 09:19 PM
Over the past thirty years, C++ has been the backbone of modern software and system development. It remains a leading programming language despite growing criticism since 2016, particularly regarding its memory safety. Some— including major corporations—have labeled C++ as an unsafe environment for modern software development.
But are these claims scientifically justified, or are they merely exaggerated campaigns?
Memory safety refers to the ability to manage dynamic memory in a way that prevents common errors such as invalid memory access, memory leaks, use of dangling pointers, and buffer overflows. Memory-related errors can lead to unexpected program behavior, crashes, or even security vulnerabilities that attackers can exploit.
It is true that earlier versions of C++ posed challenges in memory safety. There were no built-in mechanisms to prevent memory management errors, such as buffer overflows, use of invalid pointers, or leaks. However, starting with C++11, the language underwent fundamental transformations, introducing modern mechanisms that significantly enhance memory safety without sacrificing the control and flexibility that make C++ powerful.
The latest versions of C++ have introduced several mechanisms that improve memory management, including:
Smart Pointers (std::unique_ptr, std::shared_ptr, std::weak_ptr): These prevent memory leaks by ensuring automatic memory management.
RAII (Resource Acquisition Is Initialization): This ensures that resources are automatically released when objects go out of scope, reducing the risk of manual memory management errors.
Safe Memory Utilities (std::span, std::string_view): These reduce reliance on raw pointers and help prevent common access errors.
Dynamic Analysis Tools (Sanitizers): Tools like AddressSanitizer, MemorySanitizer, and ThreadSanitizer help detect memory-related errors during development.
Safer Array and Iterator Management (std::array, std::vector): These provide controlled memory management and reduce the need for manual allocations.
Compile-Time Safety Features (constexpr, std::optional): These allow safer and more efficient memory handling.
Rust is often praised for its strong memory safety guarantees, thanks to its ownership and borrowing system, which prevents issues like dangling pointers and unsafe mutations at compile time. However, this model comes at the cost of fine-grained memory control, which is a core strength of C++ in system programming, simulations, and high-performance applications.
The C++ committee could have enforced Rust-style memory safety, but doing so would have fundamentally altered the language’s philosophy, restricting its flexibility and making dynamic memory management more cumbersome. Rust’s borrow checker, for example, could impose limitations on advanced memory allocation strategies or complex concurrent processing, areas where C++ thrives.
Despite criticism, C++ remains the top choice in industries that require high performance and direct hardware control, such as:
Operating System Development: Used in kernels, drivers, and system tools.
Game Engines: Unreal Engine relies heavily on C++ for its high-performance capabilities.
Finance and Trading Software: Where speed and efficiency are critical.
Compilers and Interpreters: C++ is widely used for source code parsing and translation.
Embedded Systems and Robotics: Where resource constraints require optimal performance.
It is surprising that many who criticize C++ for its memory safety concerns are unaware of the extensive improvements introduced in recent standards. C++ is undoubtedly more complex than Rust or Zig, but that does not mean it is becoming obsolete or that newer languages will replace it anytime soon. Each language has its strengths and community, but C++ remains the go-to choice for performance-intensive and resource-sensitive applications.
Another common argument against C++ is the lack of an official package manager. While this is a challenge, alternatives such as vcpkg and Conan serve as effective solutions.
Rather than continuously attacking C++ without scientific backing, developers should examine its ongoing advancements and explore modern memory safety techniques in C++20 and beyond. The language itself is not inherently unsafe—it is a powerful tool that, when used correctly, ensures both security and efficiency.
C++ is neither weak nor plagued by unsolvable problems. On the contrary, it continues to evolve significantly with each new standard. Critics should recognize these developments instead of repeating outdated arguments.
C++ marches forward—strong, resilient, and pioneering as always!
