That was always part of the Lisp dogma. It's probably even true.
On Apr 12, 2014 5:52 PM, David McClain <d...@refined-audiometrics.com> wrote: > > Just curious for other opinions... but wouldn't this (Heartbleed) sort of > buffer excess read-back failure have been prevented by utilizing a "safe" > language like Lisp or SML? > > I used to be an "unsafe" language bigot -- having mastered C/C++ for many > years, and actually producing C compilers for a living at one time. I felt > there should be no barriers to me as master of my machine, and not the other > way around. > > But today's software systems are so complex that it boggles the mind to keep > track of everything needed. I found during my transition years that I could > maintain code bases no larger than an absolute max of 500 KLOC, and that I > actually started losing track of details around 100 KLOC. Making the > transition to a higher level language like SML or Lisp enabled greater > productivity within those limits for me. > > Dr. David McClain > d...@refined-audiometrics.com > > > _______________________________________________ pro mailing list pro@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pro
