4 ms·
It's all written in C++, so from a security and reliability perspective, I'm sketical it's going to offer much improvement over Linux. I don't see any evidence
by willtim 9y ago
It's all written in C++, so from a security and reliability perspective, I'm sketical it's going to offer much improvement over Linux. I don't see any evidence yet of "new technology". I'm happy to be proven wrong.
- mehrdadn 9y ago> It's all written in C++, so from a security and reliability perspective, I'm sketical it's going to offer much improvement over Linux. Are you an expert in C? or in C++?
- willtim 9y agoIt's not news to anyone that C/C++ puts the burden of security and safety onto the programmer. And it's getting harder all the time, see for example Spectre mitigation. C was designed alongside Unix in the 70's, a very different era. It is time for a next generation OS, but it needs to be built using next generation tooling.
- mehrdadn 9y ago> It is not news to anyone that C/C++ puts the burden of security and safety onto the programmer. Okay, so neither. Please consider reading these links. [1] [2] [1] http://qr.ae/TbSNZ8 http://qr.ae/TbSNZ8 [2] http://www.lb-stuff.com/cc http://www.lb-stuff.com/cc
- willtim 9y agoI have programmed C and C++ professionally on and off for over two decades, but I don't think that is relevant here. C++ shares many of the same security and safety problems as C, that is why they are often lumped together.
- fooker 9y agoI can use your logic to prove that there is no evidence of new technology in the Falcon 9 rocket. After all, it is developed with very similar tools compared to every other rocket in existence.
- willtim 9y agoAssuming your analogy has merit, I doubt very much this is true. Computer modelling, for example, has improved significantly over the years. However, it is true that many high profile failures in aerospace have been due to software errors, so I would say that software tooling is certainly one area that they could also benefit from.
- fooker 9y agoIn line with your reasoning, software development methodology has significantly improved over the years. One does not write C++ in 2018 as they would have written C in 1980.
- willtim 9y agoBest practice has changed, but C++ does not enforce it. Did Samsung follow best practices with Tizen? Languages like Rust and Haskell are an attempt to put such best practice into the language tooling.
- fooker 9y ago>Languages like Rust and Haskell are an attempt to put such best practice into the language tooling. Best practice often varies between projects and changes rather often, ..say.. in a matter of a few years. Most of what Haskell and Rust offer are a library away (yes, even compile time checks) for C++, but not vice versa. There is a reason new languages with baked in 'opinion' come and go.
- willtim 9y agoYou cannot make C++ secure and safe with a library.
- fooker 9y agoIf you state your criteria for 'safe' and 'secure', I can point you towards library implementations for each of your points. You can not stop the users from shooting themselves in the foot, but that is not the goal here. We want to enable 'safe and secure' programming, not develop toy idiot-proof write-only languages that are useless for large projects.
- solarkraft 9y agoOf course the programming language defines the architecture ...
- willtim 9y agoProgramming languages do influence how a problem is solved and this often affects architecture. This is especially true with respect to concurrency. However my main problem with C++ is security, not want architectures it inspires.
- peoplewindow 9y agoThe most radical OS architectures are all based on integration of compiler and language techniques - see Singularity or JNode for examples.