News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Curl is C by masklinn on Monday March 27, 2017 @08:27AM (#13967093)
> He addressed all of those points in the second short paragraph. None of those are C vulnerabilities, they were mistakes made on the part of the developers, not the language.

They are absolutely the fault of the language, given other languages would have made these bugs impossible.

Errare humanum est is hardly a new concept, blaming humans for not being computers is inane, and in fact qualifies for in errare perseverare diabolicum as out of misplaced pride you persevere in the core original error of using C.

Re:Curl is C by simias on Monday March 27, 2017 @09:49AM (#13967669)
I agree with the gist of your comment but I think it's a bit harsh to say that using C for curl was an error. If I can trust wikipedia the original release of the library was in 1997, at the time it was a perfectly reasonable choice IMO.

I doubt the library would have reached its current adoption levels if it had been written in any other language (and I presume an other C library would've taken its place).

Re:Curl is C by galdosdi on Monday March 27, 2017 @10:32AM (#13968007)
You're speaking past each other. You're talking about "blame" in a moralistic sense, but the other posters just mean simple causation -- "would this fault have occurred if a safer language was used?"

The former sense would be useful... if you want to sue someone or something I guess? But the latter is more useful in real life, so that's what we're discussing

Re:Curl is C by renox on Tuesday March 28, 2017 @06:52PM (#13981591)
Maybe, maybe not: from Wikipedia the first official validation of GNAT (the Free Ada compiler) was done in 1995. So there were already safer languages available.