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=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 23464 invoked from network); 26 May 2020 19:51:16 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (45.79.103.53) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 26 May 2020 19:51:16 -0000 Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id C5F429C96C; Wed, 27 May 2020 05:51:12 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05E1C9C765; Wed, 27 May 2020 05:50:52 +1000 (AEST) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 4770F9C765; Wed, 27 May 2020 05:50:49 +1000 (AEST) Received: from central.weird.com (unknown [198.96.117.51]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 633DB9C5EC for ; Wed, 27 May 2020 05:50:48 +1000 (AEST) Received: from (invalid client hostname: bind: DNS error: DNS lookup for A for 'more.local': Unknown host)more.local ((no PTR matching greeting name)S01060026bb6c284e.ok.shawcable.net[24.71.254.93] port=45174) by central.weird.com([198.96.117.51] port=587) via TCP with esmtp (4411 bytes) (sender: ) (ident using UNIX) id for ; Tue, 26 May 2020 15:50:47 -0400 (EDT) (Smail-3.2.0.122-Pre 2005-Nov-17 #78 built 2020-Mar-25) Received: from (invalid client hostname: the DNS A record (with the targegt address [10.0.1.129]) for the hostname 'more.local' does not match the expected address [10.0.1.129])more.local ((no PTR matching greeting name)future.local[10.0.1.133] port=65463) by more.local([10.0.1.129] port=25) via TCP with esmtp (3901 bytes) (sender: ) id for ; Tue, 26 May 2020 12:50:46 -0700 (PDT) (Smail-3.2.0.122-Pre 2005-Nov-17 #1 built 2015-Feb-17) Message-Id: Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 12:50:46 -0700 From: "Greg A. Woods" To: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list In-Reply-To: References: <8a2e9b1b-8890-a783-5b53-c8480c070f2e@telegraphics.com.au> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) SEMI-EPG/1.14.7 (Harue) FLIM/1.14.9 (=?ISO-8859-4?Q?Goj=F2?=) APEL/10.8 EasyPG/1.0.0 Emacs/25.3 (x86_64--netbsd) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) X-Face: ; j3Eth2XV8h1Yfu*uL{<:dQ$#E[DB0gemGZJ"J#4fH*][ lz; @-iwMv_u\6uIEKR0KY"=MzoQH#CrqBN`nG_5B@rrM8,f~Gr&h5a\= List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --pgp-sign-Multipart_Tue_May_26_12:50:42_2020-1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP At Tue, 26 May 2020 10:32:43 -0400, Clem Cole wrote: Subject: Re: [TUHS] History of popularity of C > > Dave that was exactly my point. Pascal was designed as a teaching > language so Wirth did not put things into the language that made it helpful > as a production language. So everyone else tried and the language became > a mess. Everybody peed on it. Dennis' quote: “When I read commentary > about suggestions for where C should go, I often think back and give thanks > that it wasn't developed under the advice of a worldwide crowd.” > And that's exactly what's wrong with C now -- except it's probably even a bit worse for C as the majority of people who have been sitting on the C standards committees for the past decades are primarily either those with deeply funded agendas about how they think they can make more money with the language if only it behaves a certain way (e.g. more like C++); and/or a few academic compiler and optimizer experts who have strong ideas about how they can eek the tiniest gains from their compilers if only the spec says certain things. UB (undefined behaviour), for example, should be stricken from the standard completely and forever. Every behaviour MUST be defined, either by the implementation (with NO recourse for or fallback to UB), or, strictly defined, by the standard. -- Greg A. Woods Kelowna, BC +1 250 762-7675 RoboHack Planix, Inc. Avoncote Farms --pgp-sign-Multipart_Tue_May_26_12:50:42_2020-1 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: OpenPGP Digital Signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iF0EABECAB0WIQTWEnAIIlcZX4oAawJie18UwlnHhQUCXs1zFgAKCRBie18UwlnH hZ4MAKCGfMhKwQoWNfrxdgt913mB/VKhzgCg37BtF5y/b0ZIuFA88XIoPYfhk14= =q164 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --pgp-sign-Multipart_Tue_May_26_12:50:42_2020-1--