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: 109fba,582dff0b3f065a52 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,582dff0b3f065a52 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,bc1361a952ec75ca X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-08-01 21:30:02 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news-peer1.tiac.net!posterchild2.tiac.net!not-for-mail From: "David Starner" 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: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 04:24:38 +0100 Organization: WWW.US.INTER.NET Message-ID: <9kakda$f11$1@news-central.tiac.net> References: <3B6555ED.9B0B0420@sneakemail.com> <87n15lxzzv.fsf@deneb.enyo.de> <3B672322.B5EA1B66@home.com> <9ka1e1$b5h$2@bird.wu-wien.ac.at> <3B68C447.4F6C2F6B@worldnet.att.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: ip48.alva1.ok.pub-ip.ionet.net X-Trace: news-central.tiac.net 996725995 15393 38.193.124.48 (2 Aug 2001 04:19:55 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@us.inter.net NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 04:19:55 +0000 (UTC) X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:11029 comp.lang.c:71516 comp.lang.c++:79243 comp.lang.functional:7146 Date: 2001-08-02T04:24:38+01:00 List-Id: Kaz Kylheku wrote in message news:WG3a7.3350$B37.128229@news1.rdc1.bc.home.com... > In article <3B68C447.4F6C2F6B@worldnet.att.net>, Bruce G. Stewart wrote: > >Markus Mottl wrote: > > > >> Any language that attempts to be called serious bootstraps > >> itself. Needless to say that the first compiler of a new language wasn't > >> written in the language itself, but the same holds true for C/C++... > > > >Perhaps this is true of any language that aspires to be suitable for > >writing compilers. It would be silly to restrict onself to writing, say, > >an SQL statement compiler as an SQL statement. > > Note that everything that SQL does could be expressed in a serious > language that bootstraps itself. E.g. a Lisp form could represent a > structured query. So the existence of a dedicated language just for > database queries is superfluous. Sure, you can hack a database query language unto the side of any "serious" language, and implement it. You've then spent much time implementing a "serious" language and a little time writing a database query language, which is all you really needed. Oh, and now you need to filter all queries coming into your database, because they can include arbitrary code. Yes, the existance of a dedicated language just for database queries is superfluous. So is the existance of all programming languages but one - you can do everything in BASIC, or JOVIAL, or BLISS. Woo hoo. -- David Starner - dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org "The pig -- belongs -- to _all_ mankind!" - Invader Zim