home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: news.cais.net!wvnvms!wvnvm!mbrown
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,rec.games.programmer
- Subject: Re: ! Read me and State your opinion.
- Message-ID: <19960419.132249.755914.NETNEWS@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU>
- From: mbrown@olie.wvitcoe.wvnet.edu (Myron Brown)
- Date: Fri, 19 Apr 1996 13:22:45 -0400
- Followup-To: comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,rec.games.programmer
- References: <4kegoq$f2d$1@mhadg.production.compuserve.com> <4kfle4$haf@newsbf02.news.aol.com> <4kmntl$jc0@texas.nwlink.com> <4kuv1k$
- Nntp-Posting-Host: 129.71.48.199
- X-Newsreader: TIN [UNIX 1.3 950726BETA PL0]
-
- Vector (cowanb@limestone.kosone.com) wrote:
- :
- : >C is a *middle-level* language. C++, Pascal, and BASIC are high-level
- : >languages. Assembly is a low-level language. Nobody uses machine
- : >code anymore, except for chip designers.
- : Hmm... okey, C IS middle level,
- : But where the heck do you get off calling C++ HIGH level? Thats like calling
- : Object oriented Assembler "Middle Level".
-
- Actually, C, C++, Pascal, and BASIC are all "high level languages" as
- you put it. They're 3rd Generation languages, if you want technical
- words. That's opposed to SAS, Matlab, INFORMIX, etc. which are 4th
- Generation languages (that means that they shelter you more from the
- hardware - for engineers as an example (just kidding)).
-
- : C++ is C, with a little extra added on. Dont call it High level, I
- : consider it an insult.... :) At least call it "A tad above middle level, but
- : way under high level."
-
- I agree. This kind of categorization of languages is based on levels
- of abstraction from the hardware, and C and C++ are the same in that respect.
-
- Myron.
-
- *********************************
- * Myron Brown *
- * mbrown@olie.wvitcoe.wvnet.edu *
- * http://www.cs.wvu.edu/~mbrown *
- *********************************
-