 |
lua-l archive |
|
|
||
|
On Dec 27, 2007, at 8:40 AM, Tim Kelly wrote:
Everyone here knows that Windows and Linux (and even BSDs) need patching regularly and so do the scripting languages, as they are all full of security holes. If you argue that you have products that do not have such issues, the company's IT department will laugh at you. If you are IT and do not need to constantly patch users' computers, you will be fired as incompetent.
See item #3 in: http://www.ranum.com/security/computer_security/editorials/dumb/ (Marcus Ranum is a pioneer in the security industry)Complexity is the enemy of security. I'll stick to Lua, thank you. (Lua: < 17K lines of code, Python 2.5.1: around 900K lines)
The real incompetents are those who build these complex systems without regard for security.
Maybe there is a different model on the east side of the Atlantic, but here in North America the emphasis is on "recurring revenue," which is based on forcing clients into constant upgrade cycles.
You may be better served with a more 'fully-featured' scripting language, it fits better in the 'recurring revenue' model.
-- Gé Weijers ge@weijers.org