From: cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net   
      
   In article <10ffudr$1233b$3@dont-email.me>,   
   Simon Clubley   wrote:   
   >On 2025-11-15, Dan Cross  wrote:   
   >[snip]   
   >>   
   >>>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.   
      
   Of course: these things are all on a spectrum, though I would   
   assert that C is closer to assembler than it is to Pascal in   
   terms of safety.   
      
   	- Dan C.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)