Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Linux Foundation Announces A Core Infrastructure Initiative

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by _deepfire View Post
    Am I the only one, who thinks that funding a structurally failed enterprise is only going to yield more fail, more efficiently?

    To be entirely honest, this whole idea is thoroughly sickening from my point of view.

    The only way to fix OpenSSL is to throw it away, period.

    More practically, though, a temporary ABI shim is needed -- and LibreSSL fits the bill perfectly.

    In the long run, an API not designed by idiots is needed -- such as NaCl by Dan Bernstein:

    http://nacl.cr.yp.to/
    ...and also preferably something written in a language with support for stricter compile-time safety guarantees (eg. a post-1.0 release of Rust, ATS, SPARK, MISRA C, etc.).

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by ssokolow View Post
      ...and also preferably something written in a language with support for stricter compile-time safety guarantees (eg. a post-1.0 release of Rust, ATS, SPARK, MISRA C, etc.).
      Absolutely.

      The only problem is the requirement of linkability by C users, but that's not insurmountable with modern FFIs -- albeit distinctly problematic.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by _deepfire View Post
        Absolutely.

        The only problem is the requirement of linkability by C users, but that's not insurmountable with modern FFIs -- albeit distinctly problematic.
        That's why I gave the list I did. I don't know about SPARK's FFI support, but MISRA C is a restricted subset of C, ATS is translated to C and then compiled, and Rust is designed to interoperate.

        Comment

        Working...
        X