Re: Designing a successor to C
In <email@example.com> Clint Olsen <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>I certainly think so, but I'm sort of wondering if people are content
>enough with C that they'd never switch, even if a compelling alternative
I doubt that there are many competent C programmers that insist on using
C where a compelling alternative exists. C is one tool in the
programmer's toolkit and I doubt that there is another tool that could
replace it. But a competent programmer's toolkit should contain more than
>And even a technically superior alternative doesn't mean anything
>- as someone else mentioned the x86 arch as a perfect example.
It's actually a bad example. The only objective metrics for the merits
of a general purpose computer architecture are the performance and
price-performance ratio of its implementations. And the x86 architecture
does remarkably well on both of them.
But, as far as I can tell, the technically superior alternative to C, has
yet to materialise. Well, for many people, it exists as GNU C.
DESY Zeuthen, RZ group
|All times are GMT. The time now is 10:59 PM.|
Powered by vBulletin®. Copyright ©2000 - 2013, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.