Content deleted Content added
Line 373:
:Yes, Java is a safe language and C++ is an unsafe language, in the terminology of type safety. Java does not allow arrays to be accessed out of bounds or dereferencing arbitrary memory locations as C++ does. I think the article already discusses this point in plenty of detail. Do you think something should be changed or added? Should we add the tradeoffs, such as Java does not allow buffer overflow errors which are common in C++ programs, although C++ permits interfacing with low-level hardware by allowing arbitrary memory accesses which Java does not allow? -- [[User:Schapel|Schapel]] ([[User talk:Schapel|talk]]) 14:30, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
: Note, that this argument was only true in 90s when the internet protocols didn't ensure failure-free communication. Since TCP-IP became widespread, the applications don't need to ensure the data integrity themselves as TCP-IP is failure-free protocol, so the argument is void. You may find interesting that supercomputers do not have any problems using C/C++ frameworks for communication between nodes. The result of any 'glitches' in the communication could be even more disastrous than you might think. A good illustration of this is that the error-free components for supercomputers usually cost several times more than consumer equipment [[User:1exec1|1exec1]] ([[User talk:1exec1|talk]]) 12:27, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
== A new suggestion for approaching NPOV ==
| |||