At 2:25 PM +0930 8/2/04, Nick Lothian wrote:
>What features make Ada safer than Java/C#? (I only have limited experience
>with Ada but from memory there was nothing that jumps out at me as something
>that Java lacks)
Quoting from Tucker Taft in
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=FD85Lq.Hyp.0.-s%4
If I allocate a buffer of n bytes, open the channel and receive n+m bytes
where m>0, then where does the fault lie? Some possibilities: 1) My choice
for n is too small, 2) the software with which I open the channel does not
permit me to specify that my buffer is only n bytes in length and it retu
> >Java/C#: Reasonably safe (both provide protection against
> buffer overflows,
> >are type safe and provide built-in security mechanisms)
> >FORTRAN/COBOL: Don't know - my impression is that COBOL is
> fairly safe
> >Scripting Languages: Depends on the language. Lack of type
> safety can be a
[snip]
>
> As engineers, we need "good enough", not perfection.
>
We also need:
(1) To recognise when things aren't "good enough"
(2) To have a migration path to "better"
Peter
**
This email and any files transmitted with
