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-Thread: 103376,c9d5fc258548b22a
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!194.25.134.126.MISMATCH!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool1.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2011 11:31:58 +0100
From: Georg Bauhaus <rm-host.bauhaus@maps.futureapps.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US;
 rv:1.9.2.14) Gecko/20110123 Thunderbird/3.1.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: How do I write directly to a memory address?
References: 
 <67063a5b-f588-45ea-bf22-ca4ba0196ee6@l11g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
 <31c357bd-c8dc-4583-a454-86d9c579e5f4@m13g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
 <05a3673e-fb97-449c-94ed-1139eb085c32@x1g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <05a3673e-fb97-449c-94ed-1139eb085c32@x1g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <4d4bd59e$0$6893$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net>
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 04 Feb 2011 11:31:58 CET
NNTP-Posting-Host: 68f44c44.newsspool2.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=C5J4NO?J<OU\PS5Xo=M[RVA9EHlD;3YcR4Fo<]lROoRQ8kF<OcfhCO[5JI2PW5S^7_PCY\c7>ejVX<;U4HBfZ;eRNUT<8N=\?d[
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:16864
Date: 2011-02-04T11:31:58+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 2/4/11 10:24 AM, Ludovic Brenta wrote:

>>> unsigned int print(char *message, unsigned int line)
>>> {
>>>          char *vidmem = (char *) 0xb8000;
>>>          unsigned int i= 0;
>>>
>>>          i=(line*80*2);
>>>
>>>          while(*message!=0) // 24h
>
> Did I mention that *every* time I look at C code I see a bug?
> Sometimes, looking twice at the same code reveals two bugs! Here you
> do not check that message != NULL; the condition should be:
>
>             while (message&&  *message != 0)

I think you won't be convincing a C programmer by stipulating that
he has been stupid and passed a null pointer for message.
He hasn't, he has thought about his program.
And it won't help promote Ada to argue that the stupid misuse
of a C function is a property of C.  You are inventing contract
breaches that are equivalent to those in the style of Ariane 4/5.
Ada's type system and range checking has not prevented
programmers and engineers making a mistake.

E.g., you'd have to show a demonstration that, typically,
arrays with index subtype excluding 16 and then accessed
with value 16 have a suitable exception handler with them.
Or you'd end up talking about programmer competence, too,
and there we are, the C folks begging the question.

CVEs, as every real C programmer knows, are caused by stupid,
incompetent C programmers who should find a different occupation.