Re: [Lit.] Buffer overruns

From: Mok-Kong Shen (mok-kong.shen_at_t-online.de)
Date: 12/17/04 

Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 01:26:00 +0100

karl malbrain wrote:

> "Mok-Kong Shen" <mok-kong.shen@t-online.de> wrote:

>>
>>karl malbrain wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Mok-Kong Shen" <mok-kong.shen@t-online.de> wrote:
>>
>>>>karl malbrain wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>That's why you developed a layered system using C at the base level.
>>>
>>>You
>>>
>>>
>>>>>build layers on that which improve the productivity (and safety) of
>>>>>"average" programmers. karl m
>>>>
>>>>Couldn't one with the same argument also develop a layered system
>>>>using assembler at the base level? (I hope that you see my point.)
>>>
>>>
>>>But we don't need to since we have C, which is the next level up. Ada
>
> is a
>
>>>possible replacement, but it's an open question. It's way too
>
> complicated
>
>>>for what I need on my bottom layer, for example. I suppose I could have
>>>implemented using assembler, but thankfully I didn't need to.
>>
>>'Way to complicated' is subjective. A foreign langauge always
>>appears to be way to complicated for a person who begins
>>to learn it, until he has obtained some competency and then
>>looks back. Of course, it may be easier in case the foreign
>>language is related to one's native language or another
>>language that one has already mastered. Thus Pascal
>>programmers should have less learning effort for ADA.
>>(Similarly C programmers can more readily learn C++, I believe.)
>
>
> Of course it's subjective -- being based completely on experience. That's
> why I gave the example of what Ada is going to have to compete with: A
> single C statement that wouldn't benefit from what Ada offers. The argument
> grows upward from there to Ada being completely redundant at the bottom
> layer. karl m

So all the other higher-level PLs that have been invented
are entirely redundant and of no practical value in your view,
including perhaps also C++ (which seems to be more agreeable
for most of the C community)?

M. K. Shen

Relevant Pages

  • Re: [Lit.] Buffer overruns
    ... karl malbrain wrote: ... A foreign langauge always ... >>language is related to one's native language or another ... >>programmers should have less learning effort for ADA. ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: [Lit.] Buffer overruns
    ... > karl malbrain wrote: ... until he has obtained some competency and then ... > language is related to one's native language or another ... > programmers should have less learning effort for ADA. ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: [Lit.] Buffer overruns
    ... > karl malbrain wrote: ... until he has obtained some competency and then ... > language is related to one's native language or another ... > programmers should have less learning effort for ADA. ...
    (comp.security.unix)
  • Re: PL/I, COBOL, Advantages, Equivalence, et al
    ... There is no perfect programming language. ... Because the original design group tended to be more from the academic and theoretical world than from the practical world the original ADA implementations were so pathetic that even after DoD mandated its use by Aerospace contractors nearly all received variances to use assembly, C, Fortran and yes PL/I to get the job done. ... the compilers produced unacceptable code. ...
    (comp.lang.pl1)
  • Re: How come Ada isnt more popular?
    ... I think that Ada *and* Haskell will make an interesting ... I wonder why one wouldn't just use Monads in most cases? ... a systems programming language. ... important reason not to ignore functional programming is [... ...
    (comp.lang.ada)