Re:Linux Kernel Use-After-Free Remote Code Execution Vulnera...
by sidlls on Tuesday October 04, 2016 @08:38PM
(#12640809)
In fairness I haven't seen anyone make a serious comment like yours yet in this thread.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Linux Kernel Use-After-Free Remote Code Execution Vulnera...
by caconym_ on Tuesday October 04, 2016 @08:40PM
(#12640819)
"in b4 'we should rewrite W in X/Y/Z'" has become the new "we should rewrite W in X/Y/Z".
Re:Linux Kernel Use-After-Free Remote Code Execution Vulnera...
by kardashian007 on Tuesday October 04, 2016 @09:44PM
(#12641056)
I didnt up/down vote, but rewriting in something like a performant, secure subset of Go/Rust/X and formally-proving correctness to remove many classes of errors would arguably have immense net value greater than the pain and cost of progressive/gradual rewriting migration from C to something with fewer dangerous corners and far less code to accomplish the same system behavior.
Re:Linux Kernel Use-After-Free Remote Code Execution Vulnera...
by caconym_ on Tuesday October 04, 2016 @10:11PM
(#12641148)
I don't mean to show support for either the "rewrite everything in X/Y/Z" crowd or the "C is all we need forever" crowd (or their non-straw-man equivalents). I just thought the early state of the comments in this thread was funny, is all.