Secure Coding mailing list archives
Compilers
From: peter.amey at praxis-his.com (Peter Amey)
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2007 18:29:44 -0000
-----Original Message----- From: sc-l-bounces at securecoding.org [mailto:sc-l-bounces at securecoding.org] On Behalf Of ljknews Sent: 02 January 2007 14:20 To: Secure Coding Subject: Re: [SC-L] Compilers At 2:18 PM +0000 1/2/07, Peter Amey wrote:[snip] We think so! However, like everything else, it is how youuse thingsthat matter most.How you use things may be an "essential" aspect, but so is the nature of "things". Achieving the same quality by toggling the machine code into the front panel is only possible on a theoretical basis, and getting the same results with a long strand of limp spaghetti is just impossible.
Larry, I don't think I was intending to disagree with you! The right languages /allow/ demonstrable secure coding. Conversely, without them, secure coding is reduced to a fairly weak coding standard level. Peter P.S. Please watch for the unfortunate word wrap in the URL of my original post. The broken link still works but goes to thw wrong place!