upvote

points

by pjmlp3 days ago |
comments
upvoteby rgoulter3 days ago|
next
[-]
I liked the idea I heard: internet audiences demand progress, but internet audiences hate change.
reply
upvoteby ryao2 days ago|
prev|
[-]
If C++ had never been invented, that might have been the case.
reply
upvoteby pjmlp2 days ago|
parent|
[-]
C++ was invented exactly because Bjarne Stroustoup vouched never again to repeat the downgrade of his development experience from Simula to BCPL.

When faced with writing a distributed systems application at Bell Labs, and having to deal with C, the very first step was to create C with Classes.

Also had C++ not been invented, or C gone into an history footnote, so what, there would be other programming languages to chose from.

Lets not put programming languages into some kind of worshiping sanctuary.

reply
upvoteby uecker2 days ago|
parent|
[-]
I don't think C would have become a footnote if not for C++ given UNIX.
reply
upvoteby pjmlp2 days ago|
parent|
[-]
Most likely C++ would not happened, while at the same time C and UNIX adoption would never gotten big enough to be relevant outside Bell Labs.

Which then again, isn't that much of a deal, industry would have steered into other programming languages and operating systems.

Overall that would be a much preferable alternative timeline, assuming security would be taken more seriously, as it has taken 45 years since C.A.R Hoare Turing award speech and Morris worm, and only after companies and government started to feel the monetary pain of their decisions.

reply
upvoteby uecker1 days ago|
parent|
[-]
I think there are very good reasons why C and UNIX were successful and are still around as foundational technologies. Nor do I think C or UNIX legacy are the real problem we have with security. Instead, complexity is the problem.
reply
upvoteby pjmlp1 days ago|
parent|
[-]
Starting by being available for free with source code tapes, and a commented source code book.

History would certainly have taken a different path when AT&T was allowed to profit from Bell Labs work, as their attempts to later regain control from UNIX prove.

Unfortunately that seems the majority opinion on WG14, only changed thanks to government and industry pressure.

reply
upvoteby uecker1 days ago|
parent|
[-]
Being free was important and history could have taken many paths, but this does not explain why it is still important today and has not been replaced despite many alternatives. WG14 consists mostly of industry representatives.
reply
upvoteby pjmlp1 days ago|
parent|
[-]
It is important today just like COBOL and Fortran are with ongoing ISO updates, sunken cost, no one is getting more money out of rewriting their systems just because, unless there are external factors, like government regulations.

Then we have the free beer UNIX clones as well.

Those industry members of WG14 don't seem to have done much security wise language improvement during the last 50 years.

reply
upvoteby uecker1 days ago|
parent|
[-]
I think this is far from the truth.
reply