[j-nsp] MX104 capabilities question

[Saku Ytti]

On 7 July 2016 at 04:21, Gavin Henry <ghenry at suretec.co.uk> wrote:

Hey,

>> This comment was specifically about how they write the software. I
>> don't believe market has enough skilled labour to write any
>> significant SLOC on C. I think use of C puts any company in
>> disadvantage due to the cost of introducing bugs.
>>
> That last sentence is quite a sweeping statement about C.

I accept that it is controversial. But it should be uncontroversial to
state, that some languages make more compile-time promises of
correctness than C does.

> There are massive Linux Kernel Hackers of course, which of course uses C.

Kernel is one of the very few things you have to write in language
like C, C++ or Rust. I suspect many of top class Linux hackers can't
be hired to write RPD or iosd. Given environment, which you view as
broken, but not being allowed to fix it may not be acceptable to
people who are passionate about their work.

>> Combine these, and I think it makes Arista fundamentally more able to
>> produce better software.
>
> You can make great software in any language. I think this argument is false.

I'm not argumenting it's impossible to make great software in any
language, I'm argumenting different languages give you different
probability of ending up with good software. Mainly because C makes
very few compile time guarantees, it's powerful tool, but it's also
very easy to write bad, yet seemingly working code on it.
I don't think market has sufficient amount of economically viable
people who can produce good C code. So my argument is, by generating
lot of code and by using C++, it is fundamentally cheaper for Arista
to produce quality code, giving them competitive advantage.

-- 
  ++ytti