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: | 2002-08-31 (18:02) |
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