2 ms·

This is because trusting the programmer is fundamentally wrong, no matter the programming language. In any good development process the actual coding is the le

• pjmlp 9y ago
  This was the statement I was referring to. <quote> Spirit of C: a. Trust the programmer. b. Do not prevent the programmer from doing what needs to be done. c. Keep the language small and simple. d. Provide only one way to do an operation. e. Make it fast, even if it is not guaranteed to be portable. The C programming language serves a variety of markets including safety-critical systems and secure systems. While advantageous for system level programming, facets (a) and (b) can be problematic for safety and security. Consequently, the C11 revision added a new facet: => f. Make support for safety and security demonstrable. </quote> http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2139.pdf http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2139.pdf
  • gmueckl 9y ago
    Okay, this makes me rethink my previous statement. There are two kinds of trust here: A low level programming language should not impose restrictions on the code that prevent the programmer from doing what needs to be done, even if it looks wrong. This is how I read the 'Spirit of C" that you quoted. And certain applications would be impossible to write without it. But you need a development process to make sure that your system does exactly the right thing. So the quote should read "trust the process" rather than "trust the programmer".