From: bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com
On 2/4/26 12:09, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> Richard Kettlewell wrote this post by blinking in Morse code:
>
>> The Natural Philosopher writes:
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>> All languages are error prone.
>>
>> They are not all error-prone in _the same way_, and C stands out as
>> especially fragile. There are whole classes of vulnerability that either
>> don’t exist in other languages or need the programmer to much more
>> deliberately go ‘off piste’ before they can happen.
>
> How about assembler? :-)
>
>>> And blaming that for deficiencies in programmer quality is just
>>> sticking your head in the sand.
>>
>> I’m not say that there aren’t lazy and incompetent programmers. I
>> remember a colleague at a previous job proposing that we could work
>> faster by skipping bounds checking in network-facing code, because we
>> “knew” what maximum sizes the inputs would be. Obviously in C the
>> consequences (had anyone paid attention to that individual) would have
>> been vulnerabilites. In a language with automated bounds checking the
>> question wouldn’t even have arisen.
>
> I dunno, man, the Linux kernel is written and C and it works
> pretty well and safely.
>
It works very well but is safe because of the multitudes of people testing
for problems and coders who fix those problems, maybe introducing new
problems which are subject to further revisions.
That is why we have frequent kernel updates on rolling releases like
mine. And the kernel is introducing Rust. One new FOSS distro is using
Rust to write their kernel.
bliss- Dell Precision 7730- PCLOS 2026.01- Linux 6.12.68 pclos1- KDE
Plasma 6.5.5
"Nearly any fool can use a Linux Computer..."
After all here I am...
.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
