James Buchanan
C++ creator Bjarne Stroustrup discusses the evolving C++0x standard, the education of programmers, and the future of programming
JB: When did you first become interested in computing, what was your first computer and what was the first program you wrote?
BS: I learned programming in my second year of university. I was signed up to do "mathematics with computers science" from the start, but I don't really remember why. I suspect that I (erroneously) thought that computing was some sort of applied math.
My fist computer was the departmental GIER computer. It was almost exclusively programmed in Algol-60. My first semi-real program plotted lines (on paper!) between points on the edge of a superellipse to create pleasant graphical designs. That was in 1970.
JB: When you created C++, was the object oriented programming (OOP) paradigm (or programming style) obviously going to gain a lot of popularity in the future, or was it a research project to find out if OOP would catch on?
BS: Neither! My firm impression (at the time) was that all sensible people "knew" that OOP didn't work in the real world: It was too slow (by more than an order of magnitude), far too difficult for programmers to use, didn't apply to real-world problems, and couldn't interact with all the rest of the code needed in a system. Actually, I'm probably being too optimistic here: "sensible people" had never heard of OOP and didn't want to hear about it.
I designed and implemented C++ because I had some problems for which it was the right solution: I needed C-style access to hardware and Simula-style program organization. It turned out that many of my colleagues had similar needs. Actually, then it was not even obvious that C would succeed. At the time, C was gaining a following, but many people still considered serious systems programming in anything but assembler adventurous and there were several languages that—like C—provided a way of writing portable systems programs. One of those others might have become dominant instead of C.
JB: Before C++, did you "just have to create C++" because of the inadequacy of other languages, for example? In essence, why did you create C++?
BS: Yes, I created C++ in response to a real need: The languages at the time didn't support abstraction for hard systems programming tasks in the way I needed it. I was trying to separate the functions of the Unix kernel so that they could run on different processors of a multi-processor or a cluster.
JB: Personally, do you think OOP is the best programming paradigm for large scale software systems, as opposed to literate programming, functional programming, procedural programming, etc.? Why?
BS: No programming paradigm is best for everything. What you have is a problem and a solution to it; then, you try to map that solution into code for execution. You do that with resource constraints and concerns for maintainability. Sometimes, that mapping is best done with OOP, sometimes with generic programming, sometimes with functional programming, etc.
OOP is appropriate where you can organize some key concepts into a hierarchy and manipulate the resulting classes through common base classes. Please note that I equate OO with the traditional use of encapsulation, inheritance, and (run time) polymorphism. You can choose alternative definitions, but this one is well-founded in history.
I don't think that literate programming is a paradigm like the others you mention. It is more of a development method like test-driven development.
Gone in 2 minutes: Mac gets hacked first in contestCanSecWest's PWN 2 OWN contest was won in 2 minutes --after the rules were relaxed a bit -- as CharlieMiller hacked a MacBook Air
By Robert McMillan, IDG News ServiceMarch 27, 2008
It may be the quickest $10,000 Charlie Miller everearned.
He took the first of three laptop computers -- and a$10,000 cash prize -- Thursday after breaking into aMacBook Air at the CanSecWest security conference'sPWN 2 OWN hacking contest.
Show organizers offered a Sony Vaio, Fujitsu U810, andthe MacBook as prizes, saying that they could be wonby anybody at the show who could find a way to hackinto each of them and read the contents of a file onthe system using a previously the system using a previously undisclosed "0day"attack.
Nobody was able to hack into the systems on the firstday of the contest when contestants were only allowedto attack the computers over the network, but onThursday, the rules were relaxed so that attackerscould direct contest organizers using the computers todo things like visit Web sites or open e-mailmessages.
Miller, best known as one of the researchers who firsthacked Apple's iPhone last year, didn't take muchtime. Within 2 minutes, he directed the contest'sorganizers to visit a Web site that contained hisexploit code, which then allowed him to seize controlof the computer, as about 20 onlookers cheered him on.
He was the first contestant to attempt an attack onany of the systems.
Miller was quickly given a nondisclosure agreement tosign, and he's not allowed to discuss particulars ofhis bug until the contest's sponsor, TippingPoint, cannotify the vendor.
Contest rules state that Miller could only takeadvantage of software that was preinstalled on theMac, so the flaw he exploited must have beenaccessible by, or possibly inside, Apple's Safaribrowser.
Last year's contest winner, Dino Dai Zovi, exploited avulnerability in QuickTime to take home the prize.
Dai Zovi, who congratulated Miller after his hack,didn't participate in this year's contest, saying itwas time for someone else to win.
