Re: Faulty languages and Liability

["Marin David Condic" <dont.bother.mcondic.auntie.spam@[acm.org>]

It would be neither criminal nor negligent to use a language without bounds
checking. It *might* be negligent to use one without bounds checking and not
manually insert the checks or otherwise certify via analysis or test that
the bounds won't be exceeded. It is - or ought to be - very well understood
in the industry that failure to check array bounds (via language, manual
code, analysis or test) is a major source of easily prevented errors. You
don't *have* to use Ada - it would just be cheaper to use a language that
performed commonly accepted compile and/or runtime checks.

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com


"Chad R. Meiners" <crmeiners@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:aendq2$2onk$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu...
> It is okay to remove a check if you prove that the condition being checked
> for can never happen.  Anyway I don't think it would be criminal to use a
> language without bounds checking; it would only be negligent.  In some
cases
> this negligence would be criminal.
>