Re: [Lit.] Buffer overruns

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

  • Next message: Douglas A. Gwyn: "Re: [Lit.] Buffer overruns"
    Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 03:20:46 +0100
    
    

    karl malbrain wrote:

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

    >>
    >>karl malbrain wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>Yes, that's the general argument here -- C is perfectly fine for
    >
    > creating
    >
    >>>applications that are safe -- there's nothing inherently wrong with C.
    >
    > You
    >
    >>>build safety in from the ground up. I gave you an example of a ground
    >
    > level
    >
    >>>loop. Here it is again:
    >>>
    >>>do opcode = nextop(env); env->status = (env->fcns[opcode])(env);
    >>>while( env->status == OK );
    >>>
    >>>I only have to prove two things here: that the loop terminates and that
    >
    > its
    >
    >>>array reference is in bounds. I can easily do both given the next layer
    >
    > up.
    >
    >>>What do I need Ada for? extra expense? I cannot afford it. karl m
    >>
    >>That's your opinion and your business. That doesn't mean
    >>everybody is like you. Even the original topic, buffer overruns,
    >>may not be of your concern, but some others think that certain
    >>safety measures could be helpful, as expressed in this thread.
    >
    >
    > The point is that you shouldn't be doing LESS than I'm doing here,
    > regardless of the language used. You need to establish a proof of
    > correctness at the bottom and work up, not look for some language "crutch"
    > to miss and avoid steps. karl m

    If you 'define' C to be the 'bottom' (where you even establish
    a proof of correctness) that you uniquely 'need', then you
    certainly leave no room for argumentation by others in the
    first place.

    M. K. Shen


  • Next message: Douglas A. Gwyn: "Re: [Lit.] Buffer overruns"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: [Lit.] Buffer overruns
      ... karl malbrain wrote: ... >>That's your opinion and your business. ... a proof of correctness) that you uniquely 'need', ...
      (sci.crypt)
    • Re: [Lit.] Buffer overruns
      ... > karl malbrain wrote: ... > correctness at the bottom and work up", ... status return codes. ... There's more than one reasonable indentation ...
      (sci.crypt)
    • Re: [Lit.] Buffer overruns
      ... karl malbrain wrote: ... > automate a proof of correctness. ... Xcott Craver provided some literature references of work ... I am ignorant whether automatical proof of correctness is ...
      (sci.crypt)