3 ms·

This has been proven to be wrong over and over again with the many variations of languages that came after C. Newer "safer" languages don't improve bugs

• kod 11y ago
  Where's this "proof" you speak of? By contrast, strong static typing does in fact prove the absence of certain errors.
• nickpsecurity 11y ago
  On contrary, empirical studies done in the 90's and such by the likes of Mitre Inc showed people using Ada and C++ were more productive than C developers while producing way less defects. That the language and libraries were designed specifically to counter hard-to-track issues were one of the reasons why. That languages would improve safety was known far back as MULTICS with PL/0 where it's prefixed strings and reverse stack prevented two of the most common crashes/hacks in UNIX/C land. The evidence is on our side that well-design language significantly reduces number of defects in production code if other variables are equal.
• pcwalton 11y ago
  Where are all the use-after-free bugs leading to remote code execution (for example) in projects written in languages other than C or C++?
• joehillen 11y ago
  That is blatantly false. Type-safety can prove (as in a mathematical proof) that whole classes of bugs are impossible.