- About safe and unsafe languages.. - 2 Updates
- C++ variable names - 1 Update
- Cloud cuckoo land? - 2 Updates
| Wisdom90 <d@d.d>: Jan 19 05:56PM -0500 Hello.. As you have noticed i have just posted previously about safe languages like ADA and unsafe languages like C and C++, now i will write more about safe and unsafe languages: About safe and unsafe languages.. We use the term safe to refer to languages that automatically perform runtime checks to prevent programs from violating the bounds of allocated memory. Safe languages must provide two properties to ensure that programs respect allocation bounds: memory safety and type safety. Memory safety is the real goal, it means that the program will not read or write data outside the bounds of allocated regions. To achieve memory safety, a language must also enforce type safety so that it can keep track of the memory allocation bounds. Without type safety, any arbitrary value could be used as a reference into memory. Beyond the possibility of buffer overflow, unsafe languages, such as C and C++, value compile-time optimization and concise expression over safety and comprehensibility, which are key features of safe languages. This difference in priorities is evidenced by the fact that most unsafe languages allow programs to directly access low-level system resources, including memory. In contrast, safe languages must explicitly control the ways programs are allowed to access resources, to prevent violations of the properties that they guarantee. Fundamental to the trade-off between safe and unsafe languages is the concept of trust. Unsafe languages implicitly trust the programmer, while safe languages explicitly limit the operations that they allow in exchange for the capability to prevent programs from making potentially damaging mistakes. The result is that unsafe languages are more powerful with respect to the operations that can be performed, while safe languages provide greater reusable functionality with built-in protections that often make programmers more efficient. Another side-effect of a small set of low-level operations is that complex problems can typically be solved more concisely in unsafe languages, which is often seen as another advantage over safe languages. Many of the distinctions that often accompany the difference between safe and unsafe languages are technically unnecessary. It is possible to implement a safe language that provides a small instruction set and low-level access to nonmemory resources, such as the network and filesystem. However, because the additional record keeping and checks required to make a language safe degrade the performance of compile-time optimization strategies, memory-safe languages have typically been deemed unacceptable for certain types of programs. Recently, security concerns have prompted limited reconsideration of these tradeoffs. Safe languages designed with performance and flexibility in mind have been created in academic circles and have been shown to effectively prevent buffer overflow vulnerabilities, albeit at a performance cost. The section on safe C dialects gives an overview of two of the more complete implementations. Thank you, Amine Moulay Ramdane. |
| Wisdom90 <d@d.d>: Jan 19 05:56PM -0500 On 1/19/2020 5:56 PM, Wisdom90 wrote: > implementations. > Thank you, > Amine Moulay Ramdane. Sorry, i have posted in the wrong group. Thank you, Amine Moulay Ramdane. |
| legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard): Jan 19 07:13PM [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup] Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> spake the secret code >Huh ? Don't tell that to Hungarian notation folks. > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_notation It was always a bad idea. Even MS has disavowed it at this point. The C# coding style guidelines specifically tell you *not* to use this. -- "The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" free book <http://tinyurl.com/d3d-pipeline> The Terminals Wiki <http://terminals-wiki.org> The Computer Graphics Museum <http://computergraphicsmuseum.org> Legalize Adulthood! (my blog) <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com> |
| Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de>: Jan 19 09:55AM +0100 > I think you are missing the forest for the trees. This > is the CMW ambassador: > https://github.com/Ebenezer-group/onwards/blob/master/src/cmw/tiers/cmwA.cc I think you didn't understand what I was writing: https://github.com/Ebenezer-group/onwards/commits/master/src/cmw/tiers/cmwA.cc The commit history doesn't tell me anything. No useful messages. Christian |
| Mr Flibble <flibbleREMOVETHISBIT@i42.co.uk>: Jan 19 06:17PM On 19/01/2020 08:55, Christian Gollwitzer wrote: > I think you didn't understand what I was writing: > https://github.com/Ebenezer-group/onwards/commits/master/src/cmw/tiers/cmwA.cc > The commit history doesn't tell me anything. No useful messages. But surely just knowing that all the changes are simply "tweaks" is all you need to know! </sarcasm> /Flibble -- "Snakes didn't evolve, instead talking snakes with legs changed into snakes." - Rick C. Hodgin "You won't burn in hell. But be nice anyway." – Ricky Gervais "I see Atheists are fighting and killing each other again, over who doesn't believe in any God the most. Oh, no..wait.. that never happens." – Ricky Gervais "Suppose it's all true, and you walk up to the pearly gates, and are confronted by God," Byrne asked on his show The Meaning of Life. "What will Stephen Fry say to him, her, or it?" "I'd say, bone cancer in children? What's that about?" Fry replied. "How dare you? How dare you create a world to which there is such misery that is not our fault. It's not right, it's utterly, utterly evil." "Why should I respect a capricious, mean-minded, stupid God who creates a world that is so full of injustice and pain. That's what I would say." |
| You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to comp.lang.c+++unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. |
No comments:
Post a Comment