On 10/07/07, Andrew Coppin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Sebastian Sylvan wrote:
> That might eliminate the concurrency imperative (for a while!), but it
> doesn't adress the productivity point. My hypothesis is this: People
> don't like using unproductive tools, and if they don't have to, they
> won't.
>
> When "the next mainstream language" comes along to "solve" the
> concurrency problem (to some extent), it would seem highly likely that
> there will relatively soon be compilers for it for most embedded
> devices too, so why would you make your life miserable with C in that
> case (and cost your company X dollars due to inefficiency in the
> process)?
...because only C works on bizzare and unusual hardware?
By what magic is this the case? Hardware automatically supports C
without the efforts of compiler-writers?
We're talking 20 years down the line here, when someone can choose to
write a C compiler, or an X compiler (where X is the most popular
systems programming language of the time).
--
Sebastian Sylvan
+44(0)7857-300802
UIN: 44640862
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
