On Thu, Jul 01, 2010 at 11:08:49AM +0200, Michael Schnell wrote: > > Ask yourself why GCC doesn't have preprocessed headers, > I supposed you mean "precompiled headers" and not "headers that are > passed through the preprocessor. > > This is according to what I called the "C philosophy" in the other mail. > Even if this philosophy is simplistic and introduced by need rather than > by science, it _is_ consistent and workable.
I don't hate C. I use it daily. But I still think it shows that it was never meant for applications programming(*). For that I think "workable" doesn't apply. Survivable maybe, but IMHO not something one would choose if you could avoid it. For systems usage, I think it is still not ideal, but it matters less. (*) not entirely true historically. C was also meant for making the unix utils, but in their time they were much, much smaller than they are nowadays. I think "ls" nowadays is bigger than the C compiler (the biggest *nix app) in the old days -- _______________________________________________ Lazarus mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
