home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: news.crystalball.com!news
- From: Larry Weiss <lfw@oc.com>
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.object,comp.software-eng
- Subject: Re: Beware of "C" Hackers -- A rebuttal to Bertrand Meyer
- Date: Mon, 18 Mar 1996 12:39:16 -0600
- Organization: crystalball.com
- Message-ID: <314DADD4.3DE@oc.com>
- References: <1995Jul3.034108.4193@rcmcon.com>
- <3taaha$p8j@ixnews3.ix.netcom.com> <3tap9h$qp3@saba.info.ucla.edu>
- <RMARTIN.96Mar13110714@rcm.oma.com> <4i862r$1evq@saba.info.ucla.edu> <64ss5$3F3RB@herold.franken.de>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: external.oc.com
- Mime-Version: 1.0
- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
- X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win16; I)
-
- Joachim Durchholz wrote:
-
- > There is one trait among many hackers that will make method gurus uneasy -
- > they don't like to be restricted.
- > This makes C popular among hackers - it gives many benefits of discipline
- > (many opportunities for the compiler to do type checking), but allows
- > evading the restrictions whenever necessary (type casts).
-
-
- What do C hackers think about the new freedom (since the publication of
- the C Standard) that compilers have to "inline" standard library calls,
- thereby making it hard for hackers to provide their own variations of
- any standard library "function" ?
-
- In the old days, when the Standard library was just another set of linkable
- entry points, it was straightforward to replace the vendor's logic with
- your own (maybe just the same with tracepoint logic, but maybe a very
- experimental replacement, and maybe a "better" one). No more!
-
- What is the position of other languages with respect to their equivalent
- of the "Standard library" ? Can I hack the runtime support in other
- languages today more easily than I can the C runtime?
-