|
|
|
|
|
by pjmlp
1212 days ago
|
|
1960's systems were already taking security first approach and the industry would have kept down that route if it wasn't for UNIX and C adoption. IBM even did their RISC research in PL.8 taking into consideration safety and pluggable compiler infrastructure, similar to what people nowadays know from LLVM approach. Some would say that security measures in the car industry also slow drivers down and are a nuisance. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsafe_at_Any_Speed |
|
Not sure about that: what are brakes for? Slowing down & stop, right? But then I ask, how fast would you drive if your car had no brakes? I would guess not very fast at all. Thus, one important role of breaks is to allow you to drive faster.
In practice, the more safety measures you put, the more confident people grow and the faster they drive. To a point, of course.
Same with programming: I prototype faster with a good static type system than I do with a dynamic one. One reason is that I just write fewer tests (including those one-off verifications in the REPL).