4 ms·
Logging is a good example of how the opposite to what you say tends to be true. Have you ever wondered why Windows logs are so useless? It’s not windows-speci
by trasz 4y ago
Logging is a good example of how the opposite to what you say tends to be true. Have you ever wondered why Windows logs are so useless? It’s not windows-specific; when you look at journald you’ll see plenty of structured junk; the actually useful parts are plaintext.
“Every program as a function” would be a disaster for reliability and security. There’s a reason no mature operating system does that, apart from tiny embedded ones.
- koyanisqatsi 4y agoOP is right. Functional programming is more secure and reliable than imperative programming. There are no buffer overflows when code is formally specified and verified. It's next to impossible to do this for imperative code but very easy to do for functional code [0]. 0: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/project/project-everest-verified-secure-implementations-https-ecosystem/ https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/project/project-eve...
- theamk 4y agoI think you want to choose a better example. There are no buffer overflows in Java or Python either, and they are pretty imperative.
- koyanisqatsi 4y agoAre you sure about that?
- 1letterunixname 4y agoGood grief, strawman... Windows is a pile of UX horrors and uncomposibility. Mandatory capabilities like seL4 combined with MAC tags like SELinux. Duh.