On Tue, Mar 03, 2015 at 10:07:41PM -0500, Hendrik Boom wrote: [cut]
> > It can be discussed > > > wether the choice makes sense, but I don't see even why C should > > > always be considered. > > > > > > > > Efficiency and guaranteed portability, Diedler. You can't say the same > > of Python, Perl, etc - because in order to use them, you have to > > compile them from C first. > > Case study above, Scheme was clearly superior to C. Granted, Scheme > code did get compiled to C, but what I care about here is the code the > human programmers see. > Without entering a religious war about languages, similar examples exist about using Erlang or Haskell instead of legacy C code. For some specific tasks (but honestly not always) these languages can outperform C implementations, in a much shorter time than that needed to get a brand-new and better-conceived C implementation of the same thing. And both Erlang and Haskell are portable on a large variety of platforms. Again, the world is not just black or white when it comes to languages (of any kind) :) My2Cents KatolaZ -- [ Enzo Nicosia aka KatolaZ --- GLUG Catania -- Freaknet Medialab ] [ me [at] katolaz.homeunix.net -- http://katolaz.homeunix.net -- ] [ GNU/Linux User:#325780/ICQ UIN: #258332181/GPG key ID 0B5F062F ] [ Fingerprint: 8E59 D6AA 445E FDB4 A153 3D5A 5F20 B3AE 0B5F 062F ] _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
