Re: [Lit.] Buffer overruns
From: Douglas A. Gwyn (DAGwyn_at_null.net)
Date: 12/10/04
- Next message: Douglas A. Gwyn: "Re: [Lit.] Buffer overruns"
- Previous message: karl malbrain: "Re: [Lit.] Buffer overruns"
- In reply to: Mok-Kong Shen: "Re: [Lit.] Buffer overruns"
- Next in thread: Mok-Kong Shen: "Re: [Lit.] Buffer overruns"
- Reply: Mok-Kong Shen: "Re: [Lit.] Buffer overruns"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 19:48:59 -0500
Mok-Kong Shen wrote:
> He said C is sort of macro-assembler.
You took that out of context; he also said other
things that set the context. The *level* of C,
which traditionally means the conceptual distance
from the source text to the machine code, is
comparable to that of a macro assembler. Arnaud
said, as did I, that C is a low-level language
that lets/requires the programmer to make all
design decisions except for code generation. It
is the code-generation independence that is most
responsible for the potentially high portability
of C source code. It is the ability to twiddle
individual bits directly in specific locations
that makes C suitable for such system tasks as
device drivers. C is thus very malleable, and
whatever "safety" (and other) attributes an
application might have are not directly
attributable in the language, but are imposed
by the programmer(s).
- Next message: Douglas A. Gwyn: "Re: [Lit.] Buffer overruns"
- Previous message: karl malbrain: "Re: [Lit.] Buffer overruns"
- In reply to: Mok-Kong Shen: "Re: [Lit.] Buffer overruns"
- Next in thread: Mok-Kong Shen: "Re: [Lit.] Buffer overruns"
- Reply: Mok-Kong Shen: "Re: [Lit.] Buffer overruns"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
