[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
A bit further toward the flamewar
From: |
rixed |
Subject: |
A bit further toward the flamewar |
Date: |
Thu, 13 Oct 2011 13:27:09 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) |
-[ Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 12:22:46PM +0200, Andy Wingo ]----
> Much respect to the late Ritchie, but C is a dangerous language that has
> negative impacts on the real world. We need to stop writing code that
> launches the missiles (or, more likely, installs malicious keylogging
> darknets) if your program has an out-of-bounds array write. Guile helps
> people move from C to safe languages, at their own pace :)
Scheme is safer than C, because:
- It has garbage collection, which solves many trivial memory management bugs;
- A buggy program that performs an out-of-bound array access will crash
at runtime, which is sometime better than to proceed.
- It's much more portable than C, so that porting a program from its
developer machine to another one is very unlikely to introduce a
bug.
C is safer than Scheme, because:
- It has no automatic memory management, which avoids a few tricky
memory leaks;
- A buggy program that performs an out-of-bound array access may proceed
with wrong data, which is sometime better than to crash at runtime;
- It has a type checker ; if not state of the art, it still stops you
from using the wrong type in runtime most of the time.
I fail to see why Scheme is intrinsically safer than C, but as I just
learnt the death of Denis Ritchie it might be that I'm emotionally biased,
so to speak.
- Why is guile still so slow?, John Lewis, 2011/10/12
- Re: Why is guile still so slow?, rixed, 2011/10/12
- Re: Why is guile still so slow?, Jose A. Ortega Ruiz, 2011/10/12
- Re: Why is guile still so slow?, rixed, 2011/10/12
- Re: Why is guile still so slow?, Jose A. Ortega Ruiz, 2011/10/12
- Re: Why is guile still so slow?, rixed, 2011/10/13
- Re: Why is guile still so slow?, Andy Wingo, 2011/10/13
- A bit further toward the flamewar,
rixed <=
- Re: A bit further toward the flamewar, Ludovic Courtès, 2011/10/13
- Re: A bit further toward the flamewar, Andy Wingo, 2011/10/13
- Re: A bit further toward the flamewar, Linas Vepstas, 2011/10/13
- Re: A bit further toward the flamewar, Mike Gran, 2011/10/13
- Re: A bit further toward the flamewar, Linas Vepstas, 2011/10/13
- Re: A bit further toward the flamewar, address@hidden, 2011/10/13
- Re: A bit further toward the flamewar, Ian Price, 2011/10/13
- Re: A bit further toward the flamewar, Andy Wingo, 2011/10/14
- Re: A bit further toward the flamewar, Linas Vepstas, 2011/10/14
- Re: A bit further toward the flamewar, Andy Wingo, 2011/10/17