coding Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Virus-Scanned: Secured by aspStation Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk Mailing-List: contact <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ; run by MajorDomo List-Id: Secure Coding Mailing List <sc-l.securecoding.org> List-Post: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> List-Subscribe: <http://www.securecoding.org/list/> List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.securecoding.org/list/> List-Help: <http://www.securecoding.org/list/charter.php> List-Archive: <http://lists.virus.org> Delivered-To: mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivered-To: moderator for [EMAIL PROTECTED]
At 3:14 PM -0400 7/30/04, Jeremy Epstein wrote: >IMHO, though, any such effort is pointless. The reality is that we're going >to be stuck with C/C++, Java, C#, FORTRAN, COBOL, and various >interpreted/scripting languages for a very long time. Rather than argue >about what makes something good/better, we'd be better off figuring out how >to use them more effectively. The problem is that some people persist in using less-safe languages for new code. When put into a discussion (here) with those who say "Use the best tool", a non-conversation takes place. If the list were retitled to be "Secure Coding in Unsupportive Languages" or "Secure Coding with Approprate Languages" then half of us would leave and the rest could actually conduct a discussion. -- Larry Kilgallen
