From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,e6a2e4a4c0d7d8a6
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-02-21 08:45:36 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!nntp.abs.net!uunet!dca.uu.net!ash.uu.net!spool0902.news.uu.net!not-for-mail
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 11:45:18 -0500
From: Hyman Rosen <hyrosen@mail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US;
 rv:1.3b) Gecko/20030130
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: status of PL/I as a viable language
References: <mHZ0a.42983$jM5.108891@newsfeeds.bigpond.com>
 <nRg1a.190899$HG.32437469@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>
 <3E51908E.9CCA3412@adaworks.com>
 <8Gh4a.7455$_c6.743959@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>
 <3E51ABCE.5491B9A2@adaworks.com> <b2spe6$p23$1@helle.btinternet.com>
 <3E5273DE.2050206@cox.net> <3E531E6F.BDFB2599@adaworks.com>
 <3E546C45.4010406@cox.net> <3E54F926.441D5BB5@adaworks.com>
 <1045763933.848350@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <42EA55F4BE83950E.F1DA277C2FDC157B.C804C1C52FE95D65@lp.airnews.net>
 <1045769690.126389@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> <2lb33b.7d6.ln@jellix.jlfencey.com>
 <1045772065.590669@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> <oprkxqhntnmzo9uz@news.vol.cz>
 <1045839283.86671@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <slrnb5cit4.7us.randhol+news@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no>
In-Reply-To: <slrnb5cit4.7us.randhol+news@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: KBC Financial Products
Message-ID: <1045845919.135559@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
Cache-Post-Path: master.nyc.kbcfp.com!unknown@nightcrawler.nyc.kbcfp.com
X-Cache: nntpcache 3.0.1 (see http://www.nntpcache.org/)
NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.253.250.10
X-Trace: 1045845920  20823 204.253.250.10
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:34349
Date: 2003-02-21T11:45:18-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Preben Randhol wrote:
> So your point is that it is better to use C/C++ which doesn't have these
> test in the first place?

Oh no, not at all. It's much better for the checks to be there.
But you have to be aware of their limitations, and know when
you want to disable them.

> How come there are so many security holes in software then?

My point was that checks should be disabled when it is
important for programs to continue operation. Security
situations are just the opposite. In that case, you want
to abort at any sign of error, perhaps even with timeouts
to kill things which run too long, because any such issue
can be a sign of attack.