IIRC, It wasn't "hacked". Rather the contract was written incorrectly from the outset, and the "hacker" merely used the withdraw method to ... withdraw.

In the real world, you appoint a judge who decides based on cultural convention (civil law, common law, sharia law, idk) what the contract was supposed to mean.

Sometimes it does come down to punctuation, but all of the time it comes down to what was meant with the contract.

Letting the system only mean what it says is not great for users, either. You get an overhead of always having to check and double check everything you do.