> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ljknews > Sent: 02 January 2007 14:20 > To: Secure Coding > Subject: Re: [SC-L] Compilers > > At 2:18 PM +0000 1/2/07, Peter Amey wrote: > > [snip] > > > > > > We think so! However, like everything else, it is how you > use things > > that matter most. > > How you use things may be an "essential" aspect, but so is > the nature of "things". Achieving the same quality by > toggling the machine code into the front panel is only > possible on a theoretical basis, and getting the same results > with a long strand of limp spaghetti is just impossible.
Larry, I don't think I was intending to disagree with you! The right languages /allow/ demonstrable secure coding. Conversely, without them, secure coding is reduced to a fairly weak coding standard level. Peter P.S. Please watch for the unfortunate word wrap in the URL of my original post. The broken link still works but goes to thw wrong place! _______________________________________________ Secure Coding mailing list (SC-L) SC-L@securecoding.org List information, subscriptions, etc - http://krvw.com/mailman/listinfo/sc-l List charter available at - http://www.securecoding.org/list/charter.php SC-L is hosted and moderated by KRvW Associates, LLC (http://www.KRvW.com) as a free, non-commercial service to the software security community. _______________________________________________
