From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: Date: Sun, 6 May 2007 14:45:31 +0800 From: "Rogelio Serrano" To: "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Subject: Re: [9fans] speaking of kenc In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: Topicbox-Message-UUID: 5b6bf5fe-ead2-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On 5/6/07, lucio@proxima.alt.za wrote: > > You may not have noticed, as it is no longer a popular approach, that > earlier Unixes provided innumerable tools to generate C code. So much > so that the "goto" was retained more to make such code generation > easier than to please a handful of spoiled programmers. > your point? > The idea, unless I got things badly wrong by not being aware of that > history as it occurred, was that C would be the target language of > choice. It is sad that engineers prefer to design at a lower level > than that, and that a middle ground is no longer even being sought. > Forsyth may be able to tell you a bit about the Transputer and Occam, > just to show that history does not have to repeat itself. > i dont know about the transputer and occam but im aware that some systems dont need assembly for writing system software. if only we have a choice. you want to start tinkering with fpgas? actually its not hard to create a processor that is generic enough that it does not need assembly and is not locked to any target language.