2 ms·
> the only reasonable solution is a new language specifically designed for the purpose. actual assembler is just such a language, as is being discussed here.
by PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
> the only reasonable solution is a new language specifically designed for the purpose.
actual assembler is just such a language, as is being discussed here.
- pjc50 2y agoSure - but that's not a portable language at all! Nor is it an especially good target for any kind of formal verification or even type-checking.
- saagarjha 2y agoNeither is C, to be fair.
- PaulDavisThe1st 2y agoGiven that to meet constant-time requirements, the language will need to guarantee more or less 1-for-1 (or more generally, M-for-N) translation to assembler, I don't think you're going to improve on the verification or type checking situation by changing the syntax to something else.
- fuhsnn 2y agoConstant-time programming itself isn't quite portable, RISC-V for example requires the Zkt extension to mandate it.