News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on The two types of C programmers (a provocative thesis). Parent comment

Re:The two types of C programmers (a provocative thesis) by asveikau on Sunday April 23, 2023 @08:20PM (#35682188)
What you mean to say is you have no shot at correct C, and so the language scares you, and you believe since you can't do it nobody does.

It's true that the community at large writes lots of bugs. But that doesn't mean some people aren't productive with the language and write a relatively low number of bugs. There are some projects with better track records at this than others.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The two types of C programmers (a provocative thesis) by preseinger on Sunday April 23, 2023 @10:21PM (#35682979)
no, that is not what i mean to say

at scale, it is not possible for humans to hand-write C programs that are free of segmentation fault class errors

this is not controversial or in any way arguable

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The two types of C programmers (a provocative thesis) by throwawaymaths on Monday April 24, 2023 @12:16AM (#35683596)
Sel4 would like to have a word.

Inb4 you move the goalposts for "at scale". This is an operating system with capability-based access control which is not something that most operating systems even have.

Also the cryptographic constraints are part of the proof system.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The two types of C programmers (a provocative thesis) by int_19h on Tuesday April 25, 2023 @06:04PM (#35707342)
I'm not sure Sel4 can be considered "at scale", given the rather extreme amount of effort that went into it.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The two types of C programmers (a provocative thesis) by throwawaymaths on Wednesday April 26, 2023 @08:17PM (#35721670)
you just moved the goalposts.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The two types of C programmers (a provocative thesis) by asveikau on Monday April 24, 2023 @01:16AM (#35683923)
Your opinion is common here. However, you can't just say your opinion is the consensus and that makes people who have other experiences wrong, end of debate. Popularity doesn't indicate truth. I'm sorry you haven't seen it working well, but there are counterexamples where people are productive with a relatively low number of issues.
[ Parent | on HN ]