Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.php > #4291

Re: Lilupophilupop

Show all headers | View raw

Am 2012-01-08 14:53, M. Strobel meinte:
> Am 07.01.2012 20:34, schrieb Gregor Kofler:
>> Am 2012-01-07 16:13, M. Strobel meinte:
>>> Am 07.01.2012 14:28, schrieb Gregor Kofler:
>>>> Am 2012-01-07 13:15, M. Strobel meinte:
>>>
>>>>> But it happens all the time. If you use tools/4GLs/CMSses you
>>>>> have to trust them, of course.
>>>>
>>>> How can I "trust" (or "mistrust") 4GLs? 
> 
> Believe that the software does what it is meant to.
> Are you going to ask what I think it is meant to, or what I thing
> you think it is meant to?

A 4th generation language can have bugs and allow exploits, just like
3rd generation languages. Despite the version upgrade, you still have to
write scripts or programs (and care about security issues, which arise
in the scope of your script). A CMS is a ready-to-use product, that
*should* take care of such issues and rule out any security issues in
the scope of the scripts of the application.

>> Gregor
>>
> and to Thomas PE
> 
> I think using a software like Coldfusion shows that you trust it
> - at least so far as to say it is usable.

CF is a PITA, but, yes, it's "usable" (some - or rather few - people
even *like* CF). I've never used the term "trust" with a language - they
are "flexible", "concise", "comfortable", etc. I don't know what a
"trustworthy" language is.
Besides, I don't know why CF is considered a 4GL (according to
WikiPedia) and PHP is not.

> Sure there is room to debate "trust".

Sounds like a discussion for discussions sake.

Gregor

Back to comp.lang.php | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Lilupophilupop "M. Strobel" <sorry_no_mail_here@nowhere.dee> - 2012-01-07 13:15 +0100
  Re: Lilupophilupop Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2012-01-07 08:15 -0500
    Re: Lilupophilupop Thomas Mlynarczyk <thomas@mlynarczyk-webdesign.de> - 2012-01-07 18:27 +0100
      Re: Lilupophilupop "J.O. Aho" <user@example.net> - 2012-01-07 18:52 +0100
        Re: Lilupophilupop Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2012-01-07 16:02 -0500
      Re: Lilupophilupop "Peter H. Coffin" <hellsop@ninehells.com> - 2012-01-10 18:31 -0600
        Re: Lilupophilupop "M. Strobel" <sorry_no_mail_here@nowhere.dee> - 2012-01-11 09:29 +0100
          Re: Lilupophilupop Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2012-01-11 08:42 -0500
          Re: Lilupophilupop Erwin Moller <erwinmollerusenet@xs4all.nl> - 2012-01-11 15:23 +0100
  Re: Lilupophilupop Gregor Kofler <usenet@gregorkofler.com> - 2012-01-07 14:28 +0100
    Re: Lilupophilupop "M. Strobel" <sorry_no_mail_here@nowhere.dee> - 2012-01-07 16:13 +0100
      Re: Lilupophilupop Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-01-07 18:03 +0100
      Re: Lilupophilupop Gregor Kofler <usenet@gregorkofler.com> - 2012-01-07 20:34 +0100
        Re: Lilupophilupop "M. Strobel" <sorry_no_mail_here@nowhere.dee> - 2012-01-08 14:53 +0100
          Re: Lilupophilupop Gregor Kofler <usenet@gregorkofler.com> - 2012-01-08 15:27 +0100
            Re: Lilupophilupop Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2012-01-08 10:00 -0500
              Re: Lilupophilupop Gregor Kofler <usenet@gregorkofler.com> - 2012-01-08 18:29 +0100
                Re: Lilupophilupop Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2012-01-08 15:49 -0500
                Re: Lilupophilupop Gregor Kofler <usenet@gregorkofler.com> - 2012-01-08 22:59 +0100
                Re: Lilupophilupop Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2012-01-08 17:38 -0500

csiph-web