On Thursday, 18 May 2017 at 06:36:55 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
On Thursday, 18 May 2017 at 05:07:38 UTC, Patrick Schluter wrote:
On Thursday, 18 May 2017 at 00:58:31 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On 5/17/17 8:27 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
[...]

What will cause a shift is a continuous business loss.

If business A and B are competing in the same space, and business A has a larger market share, but experiences a customer data breach. Business B consumes many of A's customers, takes over the market, and it turns out that the reason B wasn't affected was that they used a memory-safe language.

The business cases like this will continue to pile up until it will be considered ignorant to use a non-memory safe language. It will be even more obvious when companies like B are much smaller and less funded than companies like A, but can still overtake them because of the advantage.

At least, this is the only way I can see C ever "dying". And of course by dying, I mean that it just won't be selected for large startup projects. It will always live on in low level libraries, and large existing projects (e.g. Linux).

I wonder how much something like D in betterC mode can take over some of these tasks?

If you get it to compile for and run the code on an AVR, Cortex R0 or other 16 bit µC, then it would have a chance to replace C. As it stands, C is the only general "high-level" language that can be used for some classes of cpu's. D requires afaict at least a 32 bit system with virtual memory, which is already a steep requirement for embedded stuff.
C will remain relevant in everything below that.

https://www.mikroe.com/products/#compilers-software

One of the few companies that thinks there is more to AVR, Cortex R0 or other 16 bit µC than just C.

On this specific case they also sell Basic and Pascal (TP compatible) compilers.

There are other companies selling alternatives to C and still in business, one just has to look beyond FOSS.

The thing with C is that it is available from the tiniest to the biggest. I remember in my former work place where the asset of the company were communication protocols (mainframe, telecom, lan, industrial). The same sources were used on Z80, x86 (from 80186 to Pentium), 68030, ARM, AVR and 8051 (granted the 2 last didn't use much of the C code). Except for C I'm not aware of any language capable of that spread. This doesn't mean that it won't change or that something similar wasn't possible with other languages. Pascal was a good contender in the 90s but paradoxically it is the success of turbo-pascal that killed it (i.e. there was no chance for the ISO standard to be appealing). As for Basic, the big issue with it is that it is not even portable within a platform or between versions. Don't get me wrong, the products you listed are nice and a good step in the right direction, but they are far from there. I love D but it is not being unfair to notice that it has a lack of platform diversity (I wanted to use D for years for our project at work but the lack of Solaris-SPARCv9 version was an insurmountable issue).

Reply via email to