Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 13:17:46 -0700 From: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>, jcm@FreeBSD-uk.eu.org (j mckitrick) Cc: tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert), freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: software development tools - microsoft and unix Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20010202130742.049c8a00@localhost> In-Reply-To: <200102021957.MAA12520@usr08.primenet.com> References: <20010202134033.A91283@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 12:57 PM 2/2/2001, Terry Lambert wrote: >This is a misconception. The value of a protected mode OS for >a user is, in fact, stability. > >The value of a protected mode OS for a developer, who will only >be running a limited set of known tools, is more in how rigidly >the OS enforces _all_ boundaries. > >For example, it is not particularly useful to trap a NULL pointer >dereference in a production user's environment. Sure, you crash >only the offending program, but the user loses work, or at best, >fails to accomplish work. > >In a developement environment, the only option on a failed NULL >pointer dereference is to correct the failure. The result is >code which will not fail when moved to a production setting. Hence the notion that such checks should "fail hard" during testing and "fail soft" during operation. [SNIP] >Ideally, your OS would inherently have "purify" features that >don't require preprocessing (e.g. array bounds checking), to >the extent that it could. As I recall, Andy Hertzfeld was a strong advocate of building this into MacOS -- but to be used only during testing and development. --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4.3.2.7.2.20010202130742.049c8a00>