Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag
How will that help me? I don't want null pointers to crash the entire system in the released version, either.
Well of course you can explicitly check for nulls and out-of-ranges in your own code (debug or release) but i don't think you understand my point... the system is still not protected from code not written that way. I'm thinking about a CPU architecture in which these kinds of errors simply can't happen.
Great... now we have to reintroduce the JavaSparc processor that never caught on in the first place because the performance sucked worse than running Java Bytecode under a VM. Incidently, we keep running into the sandbox requirement, why not just use the sandbox instead of memory protection? That's how the XBox 360 does it: It forces everybody to write code in C#.NET and use their runtimes to disallow the possibility of it not being written a particular way.