[Info-vax] Whither VMS?

[Bill Gunshannon]

In article <pMWdnUsa5dUmyVDXnZ2dnUVZ_sOdnZ2d at giganews.com>,
	"Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilbert88 at comcast.net> writes:
> Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>> In article <nuvpc5ppo1sdropbtajvfdas7t7l6i5mbk at 4ax.com>,
>> 	jls <notvalid at yahoo.com> writes:
>>> On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 14:48:02 -0400, "Richard B. Gilbert"
>>> <rgilbert88 at comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Bob Koehler wrote:
>>>>> In article <7ire14F32vm9nU2 at mid.individual.net>, billg999 at cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:
>>>>>> And once again we blame the language for the incompetence (or just plain
>>>>>> laziness) of the programmers.
>>>>>    That's like blaiming the carpenter who loses his hand to a circular
>>>>>    saw without a blade guard.  The saw should have had the blade guard.
>>>>>
>>>> Yes but the carpenter should not have used a power saw without a blade 
>>>> guard.  You may remove or disable blade guards for your convenience but 
>>>> if you do you deserve whatever happens to you.
>>> The analogy between C programming and the blade guard on the saw would
>>> make sense to me if we agreed that C programming "guards" are similar
>>> to me buying a saw, but having to build my own blade guard to keep
>>> safe.
>>>
>>> In the saw's blade guard example, though, the company that makes the
>>> saw designs and implements the blade guard on the product.  There is
>>> no such thing for C programming, and instead everyone is left to
>>> implement their own safeguards.
>> 
>> You are assuming the analogy was the guard when in fact it is the proper
>> use of the tool.  Using the saw without a guard is improper use.  Writing
>> C programs without the proper knowledge of the effects of various actions
>> resulting in bad programs is not the languages fault.
>> 
>> And for those who seem to think this is a C unique problem, I have seen
>> numerous overflow problems in both COBOL and Fortran programs.  I have
>> even written programs in COBOL to specifically demonstrate that behaviour.
>> I have seen programs in Fortran that had wierd "segment violation" (for
>> want a better term) errors that just seemed to disappear when a programmer
>> inserted PRINT statements into the code to try and debug it.  Anyone care
>> to guess why this would happen?  :-)
>>
> 
> 
> Show me the Fortran code and I can probably figure it out.  I used to do 
> that sort of thing for a living 1970-1994.  If you have a WATFOR or 
> WATFIV compiler it will probably point out one or more errors in the code.
 
Sorry, that was almost 30 years ago when I, too, was doing it for
living.  It was  Fortran IV on a Univac 1100 running Exec-8.  Of
course, the programs in question were also proof that it is not
only C that gets used for the wrong purposes.  These were business
applications written in Fortran by engineers who needed something
to doto keep them busy during slow summers.  Fortran was the only
language they knew.

bill

-- 
Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolves
billg999 at cs.scranton.edu |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton   |
Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>