Browse thread
[Caml-list] Q: safe language
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
| Date: | -- (:) |
| From: | Florian Hars <hars@b...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Q: safe language |
SooHyoung Oh wrote:
> Some questions about "safe" language:
> - Is it necessary for a safe language to have a type system?
Yes, but it needn't be static nor strong. Perl (like the other, less obfuscated
dialects of Lisp :-)) is a safe language, too: there is no way that the
execution of a valid instruction like an access of a variable will result in a
program crash, the only risk is an unexpected result if you miss some $ in
${$$r{$i}}[$j].
In C, on the other hand, it is perfectly possible to have a valid code fragment
int * i_ptr;
i_ptr = get_some_address();
&i = 42;
that may occasionally crash.
> - Isn't Lisp a safe language?
Yes, as Vitaly Lugovsky has convincingly demonstrated in another message.
Yours, Florian
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners