[BangPypers] Google Go
harish.mallipeddi at gmail.com
Wed Nov 11 15:19:46 CET 2009
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 6:14 PM, Roshan Mathews <rmathews at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 5:48 PM, Anand Balachandran Pillai
> <abpillai at gmail.com> wrote:
> > The point is that so called compiled languages provide more security
> > loop-holes than interpreted ones. C++/C for example provide liberal
> > scope for buffer overflow exploits due to use of pointers and manual
> > memory management.
> > Accessing any buffer outside the scope of your data structures is always
> > a potential window for the malicious hacker for buffer overflow
> > And C/C++ are notorious for making this easy providing you with
> > different ways of shooting yourself in the foot...
> That would be because C/C++ are weakly typed, not because they are
> compiled. Java is compiled right, does it have buffer overruns?
Going by the popular definition of weak/strong typing, what has weak typing
typed but you don't have buffer overflow problems there.
I would assume that people are arguing for strong typing for
> efficiency. A language with run time dynamic dispatch, like say
> Python, will always be slower than something which is statically
Again why would strong typing get you efficiency?
More information about the BangPypers