Not logged in
Log in now
Create an account
Subscribe to LWN
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 16, 2013
A look at the PyPy 2.0 release
PostgreSQL 9.3 beta: Federated databases and more
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 9, 2013
(Nearly) full tickless operation in 3.10
LCA: Lessons from 30 years of Sendmail
Posted Feb 4, 2011 23:45 UTC (Fri) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954)
I find it interesting that you detract from C as an unsafe language by advocating for assembler.
He didn't advocate for assembler. It was reductio ad absurdum -- if fast is the only consideration, you would use assembler. Since you don't use assembler, fast is not the only consideration.
Since fast is not the only consideration, maybe you should consider safety. Or lower development cost (with which you can probably pay for the extra hardware you need compared to the C or assembler implementation at the same speed).
Posted Feb 5, 2011 2:07 UTC (Sat) by nybble41 (subscriber, #55106)
That is not to say that there are no other relevant considerations, but other languages are not necessarily any safer or easier to develop in than C; it varies depending on the project. Sometimes there really is no other viable alternative. For example, the only other realistic systems programming language I know of is D, which (while otherwise a great language) is not as portable as C (yet), nor nearly as well established so far as libraries and tool support are concerned.
Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds