On Sunday 28 September 2003 09:36, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On Sat, 2003-09-27 at 22:19, Dennis Gearon wrote:
> > Ron Johnson wrote:
> > >There's always the general point that C has more pitfalls (mainly
> > >from pointers/free()/malloc(), and HLLs do more for you, thus you
> > >have to code less, and, consequently, there are fewer bugs.
> >
> > Someday, they're going to make a langauge called:
> >
> > CBC, "C Bounds Checked"
> >
> > No buffer overflows, all memory allocs and mallocs create a memory
> > object that self expands or contracts as necessary, or issues an
> > exception if it tries to go past a limit you put as an argumen to a
> > malloc.
> >
> > With gigabytes of real memory and 100 gigibytes plus of virtual memory,
> > the programmer should not handle memory management any more. The
> > consumers and software users expect programmers to give up their pride
> > and let go of total control of the memory model, (like they have it now
> > ). The only excetion might be hardware drivers.
>
> Some would say that that's what Java and C++ are for. I'd do more
> Java programming if it didn't have an API the size of Montana, no
> make that Alaska and a good chunk of Siberia.
>
> But still, multiple pointers being able to point to the same chunk
> of the heap will doom any solution to inefficiency.
>
> IMNSHO, only the kernel and *high-performance* products should be
> written in C. Everything else should be written in HLLs. Anything
> from COBOL (still a useful language), FORTRAN, modern BASICs, to
> pointer-less Pascal, Java, Smalltalk, Lisp, and scripting languages.
>
> Note that I did *not* mention C++.
Duh. I would say smart pointers in C++ take care of memory errors without
adding inefficiencies and latency of garbage collection. There are plenty of
examples floating on net.
Its not about C's ability to provide built in bounds checking. Its about
programmers follow discipline, abstraction and design. Its just that C makes
those error apparent in very rude and blunt way..:-)
I hate java except for unified APIs it provides. Compensating programmers
mistake with throwing additional resources is not my idea of a good product.
But unfortunately most of the people are concerned about getting a product
out of door than giving it due attention making a robust product( Like the
one I work on.. 10 years old and still going strong..:-))
Business of software development has commoditized itself.. Its just a sad side
effect of it..
Shridhar