• To: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@d...>
• Subject: Re: The Rule of Least Power - does it miss the point?
• From: Charles Brooking <charles.brooking@c...>
• Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2006 09:55:52 +1100
• Cc: XML Developers List <xml-dev@l...>
• In-reply-to: <440F1FD1.6010506@d...>
• References: <440F1FD1.6010506@d...>
• User-agent: Thunderbird 1.4 (Windows/20050908)

Jonathan Robie wrote:
> After following the discussion on this list and elsewhere, I decided 
> to blog on it:
> http://blogs.datadirect.com/jonathan_robie/2006/03/the_rule_of_lea_1.html

Perhaps the meaning is like this:

    * choose the least powerful language, so that, ideally, you can't
      possibly do something dangerous;
    * alternatively, choose a language that has arbitrary power, but
      that supports analysis, so you can detect danger and avoid it.

Aside from everything else, I think a title such "The Rule of Most 
Easily Analysed" as would attract zero interest or controversy. :-)

Later
Charlie

-- 
Charles Brooking
Software Engineer
Canon Information Systems Research Australia

• References:
  • The Rule of Least Power - does it miss the point?
    • From: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@d...>

• Prev by Date: Re: [DC-XMLUsers] March 2006 Meeting of the DC XML Users Group
• Next by Date: RE: Re: The Rule of Least Power - does it miss the point?
• Previous by thread: Re: The Rule of Least Power - does it miss the point?
• Next by thread: RE: Re: The Rule of Least Power - does it miss the point?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread