C Community's Cavalier Attitude On Software Reliability

[Just Another Deckchair on the Titanic]

In article <8230 at hubcap.clemson.edu> billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu at hubcap.clemson.edu writes:
>	[...]
>    Now practically all programming languages are Turing-complete, so
>    anything which can be written correctly can theoretically be written
>    in any of them.  However, some programming languages (e.g., C) are
>    more likely to leave errors undetected than others.

IMO this is the first time on this forum that Bill has articulated the
real issue behind the recent postings without needlessly inflamotory
adjectives and irrelevant "evidence". What he says above is (again,
IMO) correct (but vague enough to be unasailable) - and rather
different to saying that the "C community" (whatever *that* may be...)
has a cavalier attitude towards software engineering.

But what troubled me during the recent flame fest has been that the
discussion has (deliberately?) revolved around  the *easy problem* in
software engineering - particular language insecurities. This is
something that with careful supervision and standard engineering
techniques is solvable in a way that the Big Problems - understanding
and specifying the problem and solution in manageable, understandable,
coherent and provably correct ways- are not. Not an easy task.

In that context, particular (and debatable) insecurities in C are
barely worth mentioning except in passing.

Perhaps the focus was on language insecurites *because* we can't solve
the bigger problems - and because it's the easier target?

	Hamish
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hamish Reid           Sybase Inc, 6475 Christie Ave, Emeryville CA 94608 USA
+1 415 596-3917       hamish at sybase.com       ...!{mtxinu,sun}!sybase!hamish