What is absurd is that you don't understand the difference between popularity and quality. The fact that C is low level means that you have to write more code to do simple functions. That's not only an efficiency issue, it leads to less maintainable code. Give me Ada, ESPOL, PL/I or PL/S any day.
BTW, problems with C have been discussed here many times over the years. I'm not going to rehash old threads. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> on behalf of David Crayford <dcrayf...@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2019 2:16 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Unreadable code (Was: Concurrent Server Task Dispatch issue multitasking issue) On 12/01/2019 4:08 am, Seymour J Metz wrote: > despite being used frequently for the purpose, it's really not particularly > suited for writing operating systems LOL! That's absurd! C has been ported to just about every architecture worth mentioning and is well suited to low-level programming. It's also incredibly efficient and has a mature and well established tool chain for debugging, profiling, code correctness etc. What do you consider a good language for writing operating systems? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
