home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: user2.mnsinc.com!huang
- From: huang@mnsinc.com (Szu-Wen Huang)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
- Subject: Re: Interest in comments on the C language.
- Date: 21 Mar 1996 20:29:46 GMT
- Organization: Monumental Network Systems
- Message-ID: <4ise7q$p09@news1.mnsinc.com>
- References: <4inp40$kj2@ogre.cs.waikato.ac.nz>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: user2.mnsinc.com
- X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
-
- Oliver R Jones (orj@cs.waikato.ac.nz) wrote:
-
- : 1: Is C inheriantly efficient (speed and code space wise)?
-
- Yes, because C is closely coupled to machine architectures. (Contrast
- with Prolog or Lisp, for instance). In fact, C can probably be viewed
- as a simple and direct abstraction of machine architectures.
-
- : 2: Is C inheriantly very readable and writable? (Easy to code in and for non
- : coders to read)
-
- No, because C is terse, it's easy to write and difficult to read.
- (Contrast normal English and stenography) Experts should have no
- problems reading it, of course.
-
- : 3: Is C a very simple language?
-
- Yes, there are few rules and special cases, and the language itself
- is quite small. The library functions are another matter, but full
- knowledge of the library is not essential for intermediate programmers.
- (Example: if you didn't know toupper() exists but know C, you can
- always write your own).
-
- : 4: Is it consistant with accepted mathematical notations?
-
- Yeah, prefix notation ;).
-
- : 5: Why was C designed and for what purpose?
-
- C was designed to write Unix, and gained popularity afterwards, since
- Unix systems are almost always shipped with C compilers (so you could
- recompile the kernel).
-