[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: backup archive format saved to disk

On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 03:11:10PM -0600, Mike McCarty wrote:
> Ron Johnson wrote:
> >Hash: SHA1
> >
> >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
> >puzzling.
> 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
Do you mean "every"?

> 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"?
> Mike
> -- 
> p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
> 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!
> -- 
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org 
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact 
> listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to: