News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Linux Kernel Use-After-Free Remote Code Execution Vulnera... by qwertyuiop924 on Wednesday October 05, 2016 @05:27AM (#12642564)
I'm fine with admitting C had flaws. It does need to be replaced for many projects. It's just the smug comments on HN that irritate me, especially because most of us are already in agreement (including me, now), and those who aren't won't be convinced by the sheer power of smugness. In short, I'm not complaining because the people who do this sort of thing are wrong, but because they're not actually helping.
Re:Linux Kernel Use-After-Free Remote Code Execution Vulnera... by pjmlp on Wednesday October 05, 2016 @08:17AM (#12643145)
Hence why I support projects done in Go, even if I dislike the design decisions regarding its type system.

Every program written in Go is one program less written in C.

Re:Linux Kernel Use-After-Free Remote Code Execution Vulnera... by qwertyuiop924 on Wednesday October 05, 2016 @09:50AM (#12643755)
Fair enough.
Re:Linux Kernel Use-After-Free Remote Code Execution Vulnera... by phyzome on Wednesday October 05, 2016 @08:44AM (#12643292)
Hey, you know how to get rid of the smug comments, including this one?

...

Make sure there's less C code around.

Re:Linux Kernel Use-After-Free Remote Code Execution Vulnera... by qwertyuiop924 on Wednesday October 05, 2016 @09:50AM (#12643757)
Unfortunately, when you get rid of C code, comments don't get deleted.
Re:Linux Kernel Use-After-Free Remote Code Execution Vulnera... by MaulingMonkey on Wednesday October 05, 2016 @02:16PM (#12646328)
Now now, some C code is commented.
Re:Linux Kernel Use-After-Free Remote Code Execution Vulnera... by qwertyuiop924 on Wednesday October 05, 2016 @03:06PM (#12646768)
All right, I'll admit it, I laughed out loud when I heard this. Maybe it's because of my all-too-fresh experiences trying to decipher undocumented C as a newbie (which I still am). It almost makes this thread worth it.