From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,36a29c2860aff686 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII Path: g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!21g2000prv.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Adam Beneschan Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Properties Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2010 11:46:51 -0800 (PST) Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: <4287748c-0962-4cd2-a36b-9dd7113267a6@21g2000prv.googlegroups.com> References: <3b84c8e7-1a51-4a7c-9646-119f1fc51478@s4g2000yql.googlegroups.com> <4pnv7nl4cdui$.1n28i7lqk4mek$.dlg@40tude.net> <1k7367gtebsgm$.18auo6u3nfg34.dlg@40tude.net> <618677c8-a44f-443e-9052-a94fb48c999a@s4g2000yql.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.126.103.122 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1291319212 21277 127.0.0.1 (2 Dec 2010 19:46:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2010 19:46:52 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: 21g2000prv.googlegroups.com; posting-host=66.126.103.122; posting-account=duW0ogkAAABjRdnxgLGXDfna0Gc6XqmQ User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 6.0; WOW64; SLCC1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; Media Center PC 5.0; .NET CLR 3.5.21022; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET CLR 3.0.30618; .NET4.0C),gzip(gfe) Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:15751 Date: 2010-12-02T11:46:51-08:00 List-Id: On Dec 2, 8:45=A0am, Warren wrote: > Shark8 expounded innews:618677c8-a44f-443e-9052-a94fb48c999a@s4g2000yql.g= ooglegro > ups.com: > > >> Ya, that seems to be a sensible approach. It's hard for me > >> to forget a lifetime of C-based brainwashing. ;-) > > >> Warren > > > The Unix-hater's Handbook has a nice chapter on C-based > > programming... I found the explanation of what C's "arrays" > > are to be most helpful in a [required] C class I took > > later. It's freely downloadable here: > >http://simson.net/ref/ugh.pdf > > I am actually a fan of Unix/Linux. And C arrays/pointers must > be groked early, if you want to survive the art of any serious > C programming! > > But the text looks like an amusing read, so I'll read it on my > commute home. It'll be interesting to see what some folks find > to hate about Unix. The only detracting thing I find about it, > is simply the fact that it is well steeped in C. I couldn't actually find the part about arrays that Shark8 alluded to (although I didn't look very hard). However, I did find the section "Creators Admit C, Unix Were Hoax". > But then, prior to Unix, O/S's were usually steeped in > assembler language (like OS/2 for a modern example). =A0C has > been a big improvement in that regard. Yes, the big disadvantage that assembler had over C was that, despite the fact that its mnemonics can be cryptic, they are actually based on English words and use real letters, which meant that there was a real possibility that the rookie programmer in the next cubicle might actually be able to understand and fix your program, leading to loss of job security. I think that was one of the problems C was designed to address. :) :) :) Just kidding! -- Adam