11 ms·
> What we do know now is that the open source process does not converge to a no-bugs state. Nobody to be taken serious has ever thought or said this -- it says
by bch 12y ago
> What we do know now is that the open source process does not converge to a no-bugs state.
Nobody to be taken serious has ever thought or said this -- it says about as much as "You know, I'm not perfect...".
Go itself (as of 1.3) is still itself coded in C, and I have no idea if/how C and Rust are related... C isn't going away, and tooling (Coverity, valgrind, nice compilers like clang) are our friends, as well as work like OpenBSDs string-handling ammendments, malloc() guards, etc.
I really am sympathetic to the complaints against C, but "Burn it!! It's a witch!" doesn't grab me.
- kyllo 12y agoNobody to be taken serious has ever thought or said this Linus Torvalds is nobody to be taken seriously?
- stormbrew 12y agoI don't think Linus ever said it. I'm not sure he even agrees with it. Eric S. Raymond named it after him because of Linux. That said, Eric S. Raymond didn't say the quoted either. He said that "given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow", which is a much less bold claim (imo, at least) than that open source converges towards zero bugs over time.
- kyllo 12y agoWell it never meant "there are no bugs in open source code" over any length of time. It just means that if a project has enough eyeballs on it, bugs will be squashed quickly. But how many eyeballs is "enough"? Obviously OpenSSL didn't have enough. Does glibc?