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 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 107f24,582dff0b3f065a52 X-Google-Attributes: gid107f24,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,582dff0b3f065a52 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,582dff0b3f065a52 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,bc1361a952ec75ca X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-08-03 00:55:01 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!newsgate.cistron.nl!news.worldonline.nl!newsclients!news.worldonline.nl!not-for-mail From: info@hoekstra-uitgeverij.nl (Richard Bos) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.functional Subject: Re: How Ada could have prevented the Red Code distributed denial of service attack. Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2001 07:26:05 GMT Organization: Go wash your mouth. Message-ID: <3b6a453c.1193942215@news.worldonline.nl> References: <9ka1jc$mgd@augusta.math.psu.edu> <3b690498.1111845720@news.worldonline.nl> <9kbu15$9bj@augusta.math.psu.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: vp177-128.worldonline.nl X-Trace: nereid.worldonline.nl 996825211 18375 195.241.177.128 (3 Aug 2001 07:53:31 GMT) X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@worldonline.nl NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 Aug 2001 07:53:31 GMT X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.21/32.243 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:11172 comp.lang.c:71836 comp.lang.c++:79589 comp.lang.functional:7242 Date: 2001-08-03T07:53:31+00:00 List-Id: cross@augusta.math.psu.edu (Dan Cross) wrote: > In article <3b690498.1111845720@news.worldonline.nl>, > Richard Bos wrote: > >The years after, the number slowly rose again, because drivers adapted > >to the new safety level seat belts provided and were willing to take > >risks they wouldn't have taken without them. > > Yes, but would the average car driver buy a car without seat belts now? > Assuming the answer is, ``no...'' why would the average programmer choose > to use a programming language with seat-belt like features? They couldn't, now, but more than a few simply refuse to use them. But a more close analogy: how many people choose to drive only on 50Mph roads, because it's safer? Bounds checking _does_ come at a price, you know. > Going back to programming, can we guess that as the number of programming > related defects goes down, the number of design related defects rises? Since the design is part of the programming (or should be!), I can only answer "Mu!". Richard