home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: news.utdallas.edu!not-for-mail
- From: glv@oblivion.utdallas.edu (Glenn Vanderburg)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc,comp.lang.perl.misc,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.java
- Subject: Re: Relative Speed of Perl vs. Tcl vs. C
- Date: 19 Feb 1996 09:41:26 -0600
- Organization: The University of Texas at Dallas
- Message-ID: <4ga5n6$eh8@oblivion.utdallas.edu>
- References: <4e3a2u$eoa@wcap.centerline.com> <4flm87$m0c@csnews.cs.colorado.edu> <4fnus0$qrc@hades.rz.uni-sb.de> <4fpi0k$i6v@ns2.ryerson.ca> <4g3dntINNna1@keats.ugrad.cs.ubc.ca>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: oblivion.utdallas.edu
- Mime-Version: 1.0
- Content-Type: text/plain
- X-Mailer: exmh nn-tk.9
-
- c2a192@ugrad.cs.ubc.ca (Kazimir Kylheku) writes:
- >
- > In article <4fpi0k$i6v@ns2.ryerson.ca>,
- > Al Aab - CNED/W94 <aaab@acs.ryerson.ca> wrote:
- > >JAVA's lack of pointers is intentional.
- > >Security.
- >
- > I don't think so. Try "portability" and "abstraction".
-
- Well, you're right that security isn't the only reason pointers (in the
- C sense) aren't in Java, but you're wrong in thinking it's not an important
- reason. The carefully constrained use of pointers in Java is an important
- part of Java's characteristic *safety* (as opposed to security). Without
- pointer arithmetic, you can't walk off the end of an array (bypassing Java's
- bounds checking) or redirect a pointer arbitrarily to point to some completely
- different object (bypassing Java's type rules). That kind of safety is
- crucial to a secure language, because it permits thorough analysis of the
- language to identify possibly dangerous features.
-
- Similar reasoning also applies to Java's garbage collection. In terms of
- security, GC is important not because it prevents memory leaks, but because
- it prevents dangling references.
-
- --
- ---glv
-