This is what the Rust advocates have been trying to say for a decade now. But C enthusiasts would always chime in that those bugs were just caused by careless devs and a real C programmer is fine.
replyRust eliminates some bug classes, but we don't even know yet how many of these vulns would've been prevented by using Rust.
replyIt's also possible that we'd need even more architectural changes to avoid such bugs.
The idea of a microkernel suddenly becomes more appealing...
A 'real' C programmer probably is fine .... but that's like 1% of the population of developers outputting C programs.
replyAnd now you have AI that's learned from the other 99% so nothing's changing anytime soon.
> A 'real' C programmer probably is fine .... but that's like 1% of the population of developers outputting C programs.
replyThe idea that there's a small subset of C programmers who can wrangle the language into obeying them perfectly is obviously, a fantasy.
The problem is most drivers believe they are above average drivers.
replyAnd almost all of them could be correct.
replyI would hope writing C code for the Linux kernel qualifies you as a real C programmer. And yet, here we are. Being good, careful, and extensively reviewed by others helps, but is clearly not enough.
replySort of, but one has to be pragmatic.
replyIsn't it said that with enough users and use cases, every bug becomes a feature that someone depends on. I'd bet that a lot of these vulnerabilities are the result of intentional trade offs in design.
replyThe only thing I know is that if I wanted to learn how to program, I have thousands of tutorials on the Internet and Youtube teaching everything from if/else to data structures and big O.
replyBut if I wanted to learn software design and architecture, I'd probably not even know where to start.
[dead]
reply