30 Sep
2024
30 Sep
'24
2:36 a.m.
It doesn't have to be that way, C could be evolved, I built a very C
like language (to the point that one of my engineers, who hated the
new language on principle, fixed a bug in some diffs that flew by,
he thought he was fixing a bug in C). No pointers, reference counted
garbage collection, pass by value or reference, switch values could be
anything, values, variables, regular expressions, etc.
If I had infinite energy and money, I'd fund a gcc dialect of that C.
Alas, I don't. But C is very fixable.
On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 09:56:47AM +1000, Rob Pike wrote:
I'm saying the exact opposite: they are
unavoidably unsafe.
-rob
On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 8:21???AM Rich Salz <rich.salz(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> C and C++ have become non-portable and dangerously insecure, as well as
>> often very surprising to the point that the US government arguing against
>> using them.
>>
>
> I thought their main arguments were to use memory-safe languages. Are you
> saying the C language can be as safe s go, rust, etc., by language design?
> (I don't think you are, but the sentence I quoted kinda implies that, at
> least to me.)
>
--
---
Larry McVoy Retired to fishing http://www.mcvoy.com/lm/boat