Comment by quotemstr
2 days ago
Contemporary opinion among who? Words mean things, and "type safe" simply does not mean "agrees with my preferred style of error reporting"
2 days ago
Contemporary opinion among who? Words mean things, and "type safe" simply does not mean "agrees with my preferred style of error reporting"
Papers on type soundness from the last 30 years usually explore the domain further than C semantics.
Soundness means that the program behaves in accordance with what its types express. You're right that C may be unsound due to undefined behaviour, but I don't think this is about soundness. What you're saying is that papers on types show how you can use types to express more constraints.
There can be other valid perspectives and definitions of that word than yours.
I think almost all (tech) arguments stem from simple disagreements and/or different assumptions made on the definition of a (subjective) term.
3 replies →
Can you link some?
That's not the same as asserting that soundness requires adherence to the current fashion, sum types over results and errors. TIMTOWTDI.
You don't have to think C is sound or good to distinguish a disfavored API style from mathematical unsoundness. There are infinitely many type safe APIs and languages that are, despite their soundness, ugly and hard to use.
Let's not project every dimension along which a language can be good or bad onto the axis of safety.
Opinion among people who know better than to try to authoritatively explain subjective words with rigid dogma, because that just makes them look silly.