On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 5:48 PM, Anand Balachandran Pillai <abpil...@gmail.com> wrote: > The point is that so called compiled languages provide more security > loop-holes than interpreted ones. C++/C for example provide liberal > scope for buffer overflow exploits due to use of pointers and manual > memory management. > > Accessing any buffer outside the scope of your data structures is always > a potential window for the malicious hacker for buffer overflow exploits. > And C/C++ are notorious for making this easy providing you with > different ways of shooting yourself in the foot... > That would be because C/C++ are weakly typed, not because they are compiled. Java is compiled right, does it have buffer overruns?
I would assume that people are arguing for strong typing for efficiency. A language with run time dynamic dispatch, like say Python, will always be slower than something which is statically typed. The "looks like Python, runs like C++" is more than just marketing speak. I don't know anything about Go, beyond that what I saw in the Youtube video. But that's the exact same "ideal characteristic" that other language designers are aiming for, from the few that I know. _______________________________________________ BangPypers mailing list BangPypers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/bangpypers