From: clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP   
      
   On 2025-11-15, Dan Cross  wrote:   
   > In article <10f30sp$1koun$4@dont-email.me>,   
   > Arne Vajhøj   wrote:   
   >>   
   >>The US government considers Pascal a memory safe language.   
   >>   
   >>:-)   
   >   
   > Have you seen the state of my government recently?  :-(   
   >   
      
   You have a government ???   
      
   I thought your people had elected a group of Feudal warlords who go   
   on raiding parties to other countries to force them to pay tribute   
   to your warlords to make up for the lack of investment in your country   
   or its people by previous US governments over the last 20+ years.   
      
   I also thought your Feudal warloads had a strategy of deliberately   
   humilating those leaders and their countries in order to force their   
   submission and to force them into paying tribute to your warlords.   
      
   Your Feudal warlords also have developed a habit of breaking international   
   agreements and alliances or just outright ignoring them.   
      
   I also really hope for your sakes that your feudal warlords don't   
   suddenly find themselves needing help from those other countries as   
   they are far less likely to place their citizens in harm's way like   
   they did after 9/11 in order to help your country.   
      
   Sorry Dan, but after seeing the latest set of events, you just set me off.   
      
   >   
   >>Pascal only prevents the first not the other two.   
   >>   
   >>The other two are not as common in Pascal as in C,   
   >>because dynamic memory allocation is not as common in   
   >>Pascal as in C.   
   >   
   > Pascal is certainly an improvement over (at least) C and   
   > assembler languages in this domain: as I recall, it doesn't   
   > support arbitrary pointer arithmetic, and arrays are properly   
   > typed by including the array size in the type, and so on.   
   >   
      
   C and assembly language (Macro-32 in this case) are not at the   
   same level when it comes to safety.   
      
   Assembly language is much more dangerous than C because you can   
   create vulnerabilities with it that even a C compiler has a good   
   chance of stopping.   
      
   Bliss, the other VMS system implementation language, I would place   
   somewhere between Macro-32 and C in terms of safety.   
      
   Simon.   
      
   --   
   Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP   
   Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)