TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy

TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Options: Use Classic View

Use Proportional Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sun, 9 Apr 2000 10:27:17 EDT
text/plain (21 lines)
[log in to unmask] quoted and then wrote:

>> Specification (I&RTS) v4.0 states that "Developers shall not use
>> compilers designed to convert code developed in other languages (e.g.,
>> Ada, C++) to create Java byte-codes. This restriction is important
>> because such compilers may inadvertently bypass intended Java security
>> features."
>
>I would be glad to see this removed.  On the other hand:
>
>I have read some Web pages (sorry, forgot URIs) that made it quite clear
>that "Java security" is not nearly what it's hyped to be.  It's hacked in
>rather than designed in.  In one case, the language syntax was even
>changed to plug a security hole.

If Ada is to be more popular, it necessarily must be used in many
settings where security and correctness are not taken seriously.
Regardless of whether or not the Java bytecode engine has any
security worth considering, a restriction against Ada compilers
that produce Java bytecode is not reasonable.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2