1.In the case of robot rebellion, they could stopped and crashed. 2.If we get embedded into a virtual Matrix, hack a way out. 3.Job security:C programs always have bugs and adding features with bugs is incredibly easy. 4.Hacking:C programs are incredibly easy to hack into and within. 5.Writing semi-portable assembler code, viruses and exploits. 6.Debugging: Support a vast debugging ecosystem. 7.Virus-prone:Support the entire anti-virus/anti-malware industry. 8.Code ownership:Code which is modified by third-party unaware of subtle design choices will contain bugs. Most C code is sparsely commented. Thus code can only belong to one who fully understands the system. 9.Optimize:Ability to optimize low-level and platform specific code. Win all benchmarks. 10.Writing fast:throwaway C code can be written fast and with macros, even faster. Imperative style with natural syntax which doesn't require much thinking.
Name:
Anonymous2015-03-05 15:22
11. hax my anus
Name:
Anonymous2015-03-05 15:35
The disadvantages of C:
The compiler is not able to detect 99% of serious security vulnerabilities in code.
Name:
Anonymous2015-03-05 16:50
>>3 Yes, thats why C++ windows is more secure than C Linux.
A computational process is indeed much like a sorcerer's idea of a spirit. It cannot be seen or touched. It is not composed of matter at all. However, it is very real. It can perform intellectual work. It can answer questions. It can affect the world by disbursing money at a bank or by controlling a robot arm in a factory. The programs we use to conjure processes are like a sorcerer's spells. They are carefully composed from symbolic expressions in arcane and esoteric programming languages that prescribe the tasks we want our processes to perform.
Name:
Anonymous2015-03-06 20:57
Try Rust. The linear ownership semantics are profoundly useful, and mainstream FP to my knowledge simply has no answer for that*. Cargo is also great -- it provides useful, colored output and has intuitive command line functionality that I actually find useful (i.e., I don't have to Google/StackOverflow every command). Rust is also cross-platform -- as in it actually runs on iOS and Android, unlike a certain other language we all love. Last but not least, Rust is performant; you don't need to do a master's thesis to figure out how to get it to render a simple 2D game without setting your computer on fire.
Also, Rust is a nice complement to FP anyway, since pretty much everything FP is traditionally bad at, Rust excels at.
Name:
Anonymous2015-03-07 1:11
The linear ownership semantics are profoundly useful, and mainstream FP to my knowledge simply has no answer for that*.
The staples (i.e. not the fad languages) are covered: Lisp, ML, F# have linear variants¹. You can even get linear semantics in OCaml.
Rust is also cross-platform -- as in it actually runs on iOS and Android, unlike a certain other language we all love.
Which? OCaml and F# run on these, and the desktop triple. There's a Lisp for each, but I'm not sure if there's a single Lisp that is both iOS and Android.
Last but not least, Rust is performant
The others are pretty good too. You should expect to be within 1.5x of C on average.
Rust is a nice complement to FP anyway, since pretty much everything FP is traditionally bad at, Rust excels at.