Re: backup archive format saved to disk
Ron Johnson wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 12/12/06 18:06, Mike McCarty wrote:
programming. In fact, I *like* B&D languages. Why? Not needing to
worry about pointers and heaps and array under/overflows trampling
over core means that my jobs die less often, which is A Good Thing.
It certainly is. I'm not trashing Pascal. I liked Pascal. And, if
you read what I wrote earlier, I commented that it is, for all
who have eyes to see, a superior language /as a language/ to C.
It is unsuitable for systems programming for various reasons.
You seem so focused on systems programming, as if the ability to do
systems programming is an important measure of a language. Very
It would be if I were, but I'm not. I was relating historically
how C came to have dominance. Each language has it's own strong
points, or it wouldn't continue to exist. Perl is completely
unsuited for lots of stuff, but it has a great following.
C came to dominate, because people needed a better systems
programming language than assembler. Something more portable
and more easily maintainable. That's all.
It is unsuitable for any large program because it does not have
separate compilation, which is a necessity when a program gets
over about 1000 LLOC or so.
That's *highly* implementation-specific.
For example, VAX Pascal had separate compilation and could link with
object modules from other languages back in the early/mid-1980s.
No. Pascal has no provision for separate compilation. Pascal is
defined by Niclaus Wirth's "Report". The fact that no reasonable
Pascal compiler ever sold incorporated a separate compilation
extension (IOW, deviated from the definition of the language) is
an indication that this was a lack in Pascal. You can tell that
it is not part of the language, because every implementation which
added that extension had it's own way of doing it.
I wonder what happened to my copy of the "Report"?
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!