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=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE,
	MSGID_SHORT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Xref: utzoo comp.software-eng:3211 comp.lang.ada:3478 comp.lang.c:26977 comp.lang.fortran:2992 comp.lang.lisp:2938 comp.lang.misc:4487 comp.lang.modula2:2194 comp.lang.pascal:3242 comp.lang.scheme:1178
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!shlump.nac.dec.com!ryn.esg.dec.com!uninet!kerber!vanavermaet
From: vanavermaet@kerber.dec.com
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.fortran,comp.lang.lisp,comp.lang.misc,comp.lang.modula2,comp.lang.pascal,comp.lang.scheme
Subject: Re: problems/risks due to programming language, stories requested
Message-ID: <159@uninet.vbo.dec.com>
Date: 16 Mar 90 09:38:46 GMT
Sender: news@uninet.vbo.dec.com
Followup-To: comp.software-eng
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


with standard_disclaimer; use standard_disclaimer;

In article <1819@awdprime.UUCP>, jaws@chibacity.austin.ibm.com writes...
>This kind flexiability is what makes C so powerfull, and dangerous. 
>You have know what you are doing to do it.

I think this is a very sensible remark.

O.K., the semantics are well-defined (as may people have pointed out),
but it still IS dangerous. That (IMHO) is a very important factor (and to me, a
reason not to use C).

Peter Van Avermaet