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,HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 14288 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2020 17:43:16 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (45.79.103.53) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 9 Dec 2020 17:43:16 -0000 Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 83F5A944D5; Thu, 10 Dec 2020 03:43:13 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DFE093D29; Thu, 10 Dec 2020 03:42:56 +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="J639g13t"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id D8FC293D29; Thu, 10 Dec 2020 03:42:53 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-ua1-f50.google.com (mail-ua1-f50.google.com [209.85.222.50]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D678993D28 for ; Thu, 10 Dec 2020 03:42:51 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-ua1-f50.google.com with SMTP id w7so757989uap.13 for ; Wed, 09 Dec 2020 09:42:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=TASUkkxwC5QcRZHHP/5r7T8xQ9RiyONq2UUTaEZBU4c=; b=J639g13txZ/wM8TyCd8+WGIbpzPtj474iWJBY95qL5dyK3eBxhhUgKkd44l+7klDR1 +gJt1SL2gQyBz0/2qVcqF/g70i61ZeHZmCR5eit5bttG4Bzl46prFPYFVDMf1+0c26H4 3edTQGkU5GN8hWFh+LeK/RX6S3lGqYtOhLa+bxDwVWSsYn8Db65ELQ1Dgk19DKyZ7gVb B2aV/awAWJOYwd9IaHLYXGiI5t5xGf8lTKse2rx9bEylV1/95HZG1IcazucrpeCE9t+4 gry5Iz7jzSXa6g5nh8HwvpHfhNFRJLn64A8+U3vX9x5kuOYMPZnIkvRlSBpiOHfA6Lxd m2bA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=TASUkkxwC5QcRZHHP/5r7T8xQ9RiyONq2UUTaEZBU4c=; b=rWNhsuaAKI14RDTrXa9bMTEx22NptaRjUo38oKEPg3FuMP1ZLWcrLpzQ/jobRRfVje lwMOy0Fvk8C1ig14tKzzgYlY8jJ0ugM8+ueGEdHmcL5zfRUbds0NgCCa8jv8e3EF21hP IHKN4eI8ApcjKMpcuTvkvwTlcsbr4LkMECOqpzmKUOsmNXMkzDn/0lLBmft4i7d7Yks8 7xvfTjxU8JTvQCq7EpAULoeRfiBXwXU0267qeiYuvS7PlcweyyyLU9CXp89syINILFsi 2zcw8EmuqR7r1e254s6w6YELogxjMVE4981sZ/rCNEBfvFWAZPxJmlpank5WFk0Jf76K yhOQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530sMgKXPt5g5sFOrLx5ABrMfGM5yhh7T+FDEuW9r8RpFXaOCFSJ fry8lTUDRvqZoAMAKRgg5Ik7Qy6NUgaz0yGkbgE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy44Zw21owXxB+DWolnajkObuUUdLMqvOOyHin0mqJgFnVZLWr0yIaStNEAUYaUtdcXDRLZkXnYCUC6p+BYuKc= X-Received: by 2002:ab0:23d5:: with SMTP id c21mr2861770uan.129.1607535771012; Wed, 09 Dec 2020 09:42:51 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Dan Stromberg Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 09:42:39 -0800 Message-ID: To: Bakul Shah Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000098525705b60b969a" Subject: Re: [TUHS] Were cron and at done at the same time? Or one before the other? 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: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --00000000000098525705b60b969a Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 9:08 AM Bakul Shah wrote: > Ah .. but I don=E2=80=99t know if they did! The implication that Pascal f= olks like > complexity seems strange as Pascal is far simpler than C++ (not much larg= er > than C) and C++ is no more type safe than C (both are less type safe than > Pascal). Anyway I will stop now! > I was one of the people who happily left Pascal behind to move to C. But in retrospect, I think the computing world would've been better off with Pascal, modified slightly to allow passing variable-length arrays (like TurboPascal). I never did make the move to C++ - I've written only a little code in it. Instead, when a lot of people were moving from C to C++ or Perl, I fished around and hit upon a little-known language called Python (OCaml was runner up). My management was practically nonexistent back then, so no one told me "No, use what everyone else is using!" --00000000000098525705b60b969a Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 9:08 AM Bakul Shah= <bakul@iitbombay.org> wro= te:
Ah .. but I don=E2=80=99t know if they did! The impl= ication that Pascal folks like complexity seems strange as Pascal is far si= mpler than C++ (not much larger than C) and C++ is no more type safe than C= (both are less type safe than Pascal). Anyway I will stop now!
<= /div>

I was one of the people who happily l= eft Pascal behind to move to C.=C2=A0 But in retrospect, I think the comput= ing world would've been better off with Pascal, modified slightly to al= low passing variable-length arrays (like TurboPascal).

=
I never did make the move to C++ - I've written only a little code= in it.=C2=A0 Instead, when a lot of people were moving from C to C++ or Pe= rl, I fished around and hit upon a little-known language called Python (OCa= ml was runner up).=C2=A0 My management was practically nonexistent back the= n, so no one told me "No, use what everyone else is using!"

--00000000000098525705b60b969a--