OOps... First ... I've replied to a wrong thread. Sorry for that

On my own humble opinion )) C is the best language after Assembler,
MacroAssembler. Intuitive, fast, efficient.... Just an opinion ))

On Thu, 2012-08-09 at 11:31 -0400, Mathieu Trudel-Lapierre wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Hendrik Boom <[email protected]> wrote:
> [...]
> > It survives because of inertia.  It's the systems language most people
> > use, so most systems programs are written in it, and so most programmers
> > have to learn it, because a lot of programming deals with changes to
> > existing software, not writing new.  Because most programmers know it,
> > most new programs get written in it.
> 
> Can you explain why you think C is obsolete? What issues makes it so?
> Please provide examples, alternatives, solutions.
> 
> IMHO, no amount of convenience of programming (e.g. easy to code in,
> or easy to learn), or nice features like garbage collection and
> whatnot amount for the flexibility and power that C provides.
> 
> Yes, it's complicated, yes, it's definitely not always the right
> choice for just any project, and yes, you have more than enough rope
> to shoot yourself in the foot with when you use C... ;)  But it
> remains that all languages have different purposes, different
> strengths and weaknesses.
> 
> Cobol is clearly an obsolete language that is still sticking around
> due to inertia -- most people aren't writing new things in it, but are
> forced to maintain existing complex systems because of the cost of
> rewriting from scratch.
> 
> C however, *is* being used for new projects. It's being taught in
> schools (though definitely not everywhere), and is a clear choice, at
> least to be considered, when building complex systems. It's not only
> used for new projects because most programmers know it -- but because
> it really works. I've seen a definite shift in schools from teaching C
> to teaching other programming languages, at least in CEGEPs.
> 
> I have yet to see other languages that provide the level of
> reliability and speed of execution of well-written C. I have also yet
> to see any language (other than C++) that makes it as easy to leak
> memory and make hard to debug, painful mistakes as C.
> 
> Don't get me wrong -- I'd just as well use Python for most things I'd
> write, and I wouldn't hesitate to use Java or god-forbid, ocaml should
> it clearly be the right tool for the job; but I totally disagree that
> C is obsolete, and you haven't brought evidence to support your
> position.
> 
> [...]
> 
> > Modula 3's specific handicap is that it's distributed under a
> > free-sofware licence that happens to be incompatible with the GPL and
> > after a series of  corporate takeovers, the entity that now owns the
> > copyright no longer has any interest in it, so it's impossible to get
> > the licence changed.  And it's not popular enough to make it worth-while
> > to write a new implementation.
> 
> I had never heard of Modula. But again, there are so many different
> languages out there, it's impossible to know them all.
> 
> Why has it not gained in popularity? It's highly likely that there are
> very good reasons for that. Maybe it's just really good at one
> specific thing, and its use can't be generalized to just about any
> problem?
> 
> The licensing is a definite issue. There are so many "free" languages
> to choose from, all of them particularly well designed and that have
> proven their efficiency and reliability, that there is no reason to
> choose a "private" implementation for anything. If only just the fact
> that then, the pool of people that have designed and have seen the
> internals is so small, you're absolutely in your right to question
> whether it's really going to do the job right in the long run, or if
> it's just a matter of time before it explodes.
> 
> > But you're right.  No one is about to rewrite the Linux kernel in
> > another language.  It's too much work.
> 
> I don't think the amount of work required is the real blocker in open
> source projects. People have tried re-implementing X. Everyone knows
> just how complex X is and how much work it would be to rewrite it from
> scratch. It hasn't stopped various re-implementations to spring up,
> like Wayland.
> 
> / Matt
> _______________________________________________
> mlug mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://listes.koumbit.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mlug-listserv.mlug.ca

_______________________________________________
mlug mailing list
[email protected]
https://listes.koumbit.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mlug-listserv.mlug.ca

Reply via email to