2014-05-04 17:40 GMT+02:00 Evan Rowley <rowley.e...@gmail.com>: > Most functional languages have design features that enhance their > security. I'm referring to Clojure, Haskell, and Erlang, but this won't be > limited to those three. As someone who was hired to handle cyber security > needs of a contracting IT company, my personal and professional opinion is > this: I would trust someone who programs in a functional language to create > _and_ maintain software that is relatively more secure.
Have you any pointers about this? > But you know what? While Microsoft and Adobe were focusing on making their > products easier to use for their next target market, the Clojure devs were > busy designing a language that is error- > Often easy of use is contrary to safety. I do not say that they cannot be combined, but making a program saver can make it harder to use and making a program easier to use can make it less save. > were building lame FTP clients into their development tools, the Lein devs > were doing better by integrating Maven's build and dependency management > into a dead-simple deployment tool that > I was very pleasantly surprised how lein worked. :-D > works well with all kinds of online code repositories. Code repositories > which by the way, nether Adobe or Microsoft had (at the time) encouraged > the use of. Even though much of Clojure is still terminal based (i.e., REPL > ), at least there aren't multiple levels of undocumented and proprietary > abstraction. With Clojure, you can get as abstract or as low level as you > want (OpenJDK, > Well, I find the REPL a big plus. > By now I might sound critical of other developers, but you have to > understand that many of these groups get paid A LOT of money to create > things correctly. > Nothing wrong about being critical. (In reason.) > On 4 May 2014 08:24, Cecil Westerhof <cldwester...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I heard the stand that functional programming made it difficult to write >>> secure programs. I do not know enough of functional programming yet to >>> determine the value of a statement like this. What is the take here about >>> it? >>> >> -- Cecil Westerhof -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
