Jasen Betts
Guest
Wed Nov 30, 2011 11:38 am
On 2011-11-29, terryc <newsninespam-spam_at_woa.com.au> wrote:
Quote:
keithr wrote:
On 29/11/2011 6:58 PM, terryc wrote:
swanny wrote:
Rubbish. C is an excellent language to program in. If the best you can
do is Basic then you probably need to learn how to program properly.
Typical comment I've come to expect. How did you learn it?
If C is so great, how come there was that security bug in randomisation
for so many months. It was a basic mistake and in any other language it
could have been picked up by a beginner reading te source code.
What a load of crap, that would be a problem with a particular
implementation not the language itself.
The problem is that the language is so cryptic, you have to be well
versed to spot a simple mstake. similarly, it makes it very difficult
for people to teach themselves by reading the code.
All useful languages are like that. (not just computer programming languages,
all.)
C is one of the smallestt languages. it's got fewer keywords and
other symbols than most other languages.
Quote:
My 2c is that if the language lends itself to faulty implementations,
then it isn't such a great language.
that's like saying if aome automobiles crash then the concept of
automibiles is flawed
--
⚂⚃ 100% natural
--- Posted via
news://freenews.netfront.net/ - Complaints to news_at_netfront.net ---
Gary R. Schmidt
Guest
Thu Dec 01, 2011 12:28 pm
On 30/11/2011 1:28 AM, terryc wrote:
Quote:
keithr wrote:
On 29/11/2011 6:58 PM, terryc wrote:
swanny wrote:
Rubbish. C is an excellent language to program in. If the best you can
do is Basic then you probably need to learn how to program properly.
Typical comment I've come to expect. How did you learn it?
If C is so great, how come there was that security bug in randomisation
for so many months. It was a basic mistake and in any other language it
could have been picked up by a beginner reading te source code.
What a load of crap, that would be a problem with a particular
implementation not the language itself.
The problem is that the language is so cryptic, you have to be well
versed to spot a simple mstake. similarly, it makes it very difficult
for people to teach themselves by reading the code.
The problem was that a /temporary/ change - made to stabilise things
while something else was being tested - got put back *without* being
reviewed.
Quote:
My 2c is that if the language lends itself to faulty implementations,
then it isn't such a great language.
It doesn't matter *what* language you use, if the code isn't reviewed
then using it could cause the proverbial monkeys to fly out your butt!
Yes, I use C, and prefer it. I learned it back in 1981, after learning
Pascal in 1980, and then various assemblers and COBOLs and FORTRANs and
DIBOL and SPL and SPAN and POWERflex and perl and SQL and C++ and ...
Cheers,
Gary B-)
--
When men talk to their friends, they insult each other.
They don't really mean it.
When women talk to their friends, they compliment each other.
They don't mean it either.
