3 ms·

No, it is the issue. Before one can even consider the proposition that it might not be wise to write X in C, you first need to convince people that the tool (th

No, it is the issue. Before one can even consider the proposition that it might not be wise to write X in C, you first need to convince people that the tool (that is, C) is actually a problem. That's what the OP is targeting: people think the problem isn't the tooling, but the programmer. The task of figuring out how to actually use the language is an entirely separate, though valid, problem. But it's not some giant mystery. The folks working on Firefox haven't set out to rewrite the entire thing in Rust. They're choosing targeted places where it works. Insomuch as I know, this has been a success.

pron 8y ago
But even if (assuming that safe languages have reached a point where they can be a suitable replacement to C in all circumstances, which they haven't yet) not a single new project is written in C from now on, it will take decades for our software to become more secure. The question is what do we do until then. There are some excellent tools that can be used, but aren't.
- burntsushi 8y ago
  Who are you arguing with? Not me, because I didn't claim otherwise. And certainly not the OP. You're missing the part where people don't even recognize the problem in the first place. You have to fix that first.
  - pron 8y ago
    I think enough people recognize the problem with C. But a rewrite is just not a relevant solution to the actual problem we're facing. It's a long-term solution, but that's not what we need now.
mamcx 8y ago
> people think the problem isn't the tooling, but the programmer I extend it, and say that choosing a bad tool is a sing of a bad programmer (even if the programmer is so skilled that use C very well!), but the resistance of recognize C/C++/JS to be BAD, REALLY REALLY BAD, PLEASE NOT USE THIS ANYMORE (only in rare exceptions, and still not use it ok?) Make this a full circle. We need more "good" programmers to express this, alike how say "use of carbon/fuels is bad, and the fact the WHOLE ECONOMY OF THE PLANET is not an excuse to not replace it ASAP!" And yes, why not make a concerted effort of make real replacement to well chosen libraries? I think using the pareto principle, we can target 20% of the most popular stuff and have a huge impact.

pron 8y ago

But even if (assuming that safe languages have reached a point where they can be a suitable replacement to C in all circumstances, which they haven't yet) not a single new project is written in C from now on, it will take decades for our software to become more secure. The question is what do we do until then. There are some excellent tools that can be used, but aren't.

burntsushi 8y ago
Who are you arguing with? Not me, because I didn't claim otherwise. And certainly not the OP. You're missing the part where people don't even recognize the problem in the first place. You have to fix that first.
- pron 8y ago
  I think enough people recognize the problem with C. But a rewrite is just not a relevant solution to the actual problem we're facing. It's a long-term solution, but that's not what we need now.

mamcx 8y ago

> people think the problem isn't the tooling, but the programmer I extend it, and say that choosing a bad tool is a sing of a bad programmer (even if the programmer is so skilled that use C very well!), but the resistance of recognize C/C++/JS to be BAD, REALLY REALLY BAD, PLEASE NOT USE THIS ANYMORE (only in rare exceptions, and still not use it ok?) Make this a full circle. We need more "good" programmers to express this, alike how say "use of carbon/fuels is bad, and the fact the WHOLE ECONOMY OF THE PLANET is not an excuse to not replace it ASAP!" And yes, why not make a concerted effort of make real replacement to well chosen libraries? I think using the pareto principle, we can target 20% of the most popular stuff and have a huge impact.