From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FROM,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 27513 invoked from network); 21 May 2020 19:07:05 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (45.79.103.53) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 21 May 2020 19:07:05 -0000 Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id AA82F9C926; Fri, 22 May 2020 05:07:01 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D946D9C851; Fri, 22 May 2020 05:06:11 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="fDYdpcto"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 1D9C79C851; Fri, 22 May 2020 05:06:10 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-vs1-f52.google.com (mail-vs1-f52.google.com [209.85.217.52]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8A37B9C5EC for ; Fri, 22 May 2020 05:06:09 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-vs1-f52.google.com with SMTP id t4so2798508vsq.0 for ; Thu, 21 May 2020 12:06:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=HTT0NKBpJJnooPFpvUquA3KNJU0Vl70zfKp+12ZzfFM=; b=fDYdpctoQMx+5Q6DqvQBYIsuUktn1zoSNnv/B+qOKX4nsBOyzdqWecR3ZT2QGfucGi AfgxYJhiue7nliv5mRl3hdoFrGHvr1eYKNchMC/f9RTw5hRbTzJXR5ML0ZCY1XlnIaWQ Mcr9ESSSHISjCoX4CkT3MJiEyeCOpJzwPZ0GQDRQp2Mp/1dBRnZT2kGVovJ97SZdnl4c j3p9mHUVogyLuznRTPJU5Q0X083PH0ddC+pORES3BiAnZ3i/X7wnAl1P3/zQtNX68s9m uXiCKgiD9GE/BSygIuuOs0FZh8WxI+horg1NJc/aRc4QuXd/Z7bHDgniN+zOIHVJq1gy 50bg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=HTT0NKBpJJnooPFpvUquA3KNJU0Vl70zfKp+12ZzfFM=; b=aAeIhKf8yLbe9+Pj5kQGY7eePnfWUMhMfeYq6/SswJ+0DNeEtua4jsRdp1j7zwuNCC roAZFmX9+R1vV9twMyycOgLb/5XK9Y+CnC1fFYDmknH02lvX96CaEneRR0fHEsZsKqQk t0Q+oQ3sWOzaW++0lj1wlVqcbg4uwnRvqB1NQZaDfPHtCzbQHYzvbD2Co04vkAkHrwJJ PDaqCwFCmuZPryYrss9/8+l8i3cT0RWzpNW48IyHGxD2Dr9pVrZPH7FMz/Durfx7NhbS hECYZOlQipexst0wFlDaKdeGaQ7OOl2vPuVbiXnaXA0C86WgOD2Qtp2xNXsZKF7AqAIG Q9qQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531XM63YbbkkYbgWlotLqpzmDCZERUr1TsZgZQocEIeDa9VjxXt5 8DD4qKQABhc+6giaJFDyDI38ttQ4KIvJKUxNEIA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw9udQBKEU4grYC/NYHC8uK+mkTgnrNvCWPHtKWPrOhjdoaW2ouWJRMSv5Oh1fS1LZZgL28uUpOiH4PlzuELnE= X-Received: by 2002:a67:eb47:: with SMTP id x7mr8106550vso.179.1590087968745; Thu, 21 May 2020 12:06:08 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:ab0:2b92:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Thu, 21 May 2020 12:06:08 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <97649ed8e0655b6d875135c20fe8062e@firemail.de> References: <20200521182817.08C0318C093@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <97649ed8e0655b6d875135c20fe8062e@firemail.de> From: Paul Winalski Date: Thu, 21 May 2020 15:06:08 -0400 Message-ID: To: Thomas Paulsen Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [TUHS] History of popularity of C X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: tuhs@tuhs.org, "jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu \(Noel Chiappa\)" Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" On 5/21/20, Thomas Paulsen wrote: >>I suspect the real reason for C's sucess was the nature of the language. > it has most of the elements of structured programming as known in the > 70the/80ths, and - most important - it produces small and fast performing > binaries like no other high level language. Sorry, but I can't agree with that statement (like no other high-level language). C is a decent language for systems programming but so are other languages such as BLISS. C is a terrible language if you have to throw arrays around (which is why Fortran still rules the roost in HPTC). C, Pascsal, and other modern Algol-ish languages have well-behaved grammars and were designed to be easy to lex and parse. Fortran and COBOL were designed before Chomsky's work on formal grammars became well known, and as a consequence are bears to parse. Fortran has context-sensitive lexical analysis, for example. But nobody knew any better back then. -Paul W.