Re: Programming Languages, "to C or not to C, that is the Q."
Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't there a few (well ok, at least one)
OS written in SmallTalk ? I seem to remember that from my computer
science courses. I could be something planted in my memory by some evil
alien that wanted to promote wide-spread use of SmallTalk, tho :)
Regards,
Jeff
On Sun, 2005-01-23 at 21:52 -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> Writing an OS in an interpreted language????? Unless it's using
> psyco.
>
> Still, every language has a domain that it's best able to solve,
> and it should stick to it.
>
Reply to:
- References:
- Programming Languages, "to C or not to C, that is the Q."
- From: Scotty Fitzgerald <sfitz007@bestweb.net>
- Re: Programming Languages, "to C or not to C, that is the Q."
- From: Rogério Brito <rbrito@ime.usp.br>
- Re: Programming Languages, "to C or not to C, that is the Q."
- From: Scotty Fitzgerald <sfitz007@bestweb.net>
- Re: Programming Languages, "to C or not to C, that is the Q."
- From: Ron Johnson <ron.l.johnson@cox.net>
- Re: Programming Languages, "to C or not to C, that is the Q."
- From: Nate Bargmann <n0nb@networksplus.net>
- Re: Programming Languages, "to C or not to C, that is the Q."
- From: Ron Johnson <ron.l.johnson@cox.net>