Subject: replace C for systems programming! (was: gcc optimizer bug in netbsd-1-6 on alpha (gcc 2.95.3 20010315 (release) (NetBSD nb3)))
To: Greywolf <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Greg A. Woods <email@example.com>
Date: 08/16/2003 20:35:56
[ On Friday, August 15, 2003 at 17:44:13 (-0700), Greywolf wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: gcc optimizer bug in netbsd-1-6 on alpha (gcc 2.95.3 20010315 (release) (NetBSD nb3))
> Thus spake Nathan J. Williams ("NJW> ") sometime Today...
> NJW> We should be working on abolishing C, not justifying it.
> ...wow. I can't believe I'm reading this. Show of hands, please, as
> to how on target this is? I'm leaving mine down, as I cannot see
> this to be a particularly useful concept! Abolish C? Really? And
> nail everything into a very tightly defined structure that takes longer
> to parse, align, code-generate and (probably) learn?!?
Count me on the "Abolish C A.S.A.P.!!!!" side. :-/
(I keep planning on trying out Cyclone as a possible replacement....)
> My question stands: What is SO WRONG with C that it should, as you have
> put it, "be buried in an unmarked grave at midnight"? I seek enlightenment!
some hints here, especially in the first paper referenced:
(Of course I'm not willing to bury C until _after_ they bury C++. It
just has to go first! :-)
Greg A. Woods
+1 416 218-0098 VE3TCP RoboHack <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Planix, Inc. <email@example.com> Secrets of the Weird <firstname.lastname@example.org>