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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 10c950,90121986704b5776 X-Google-Attributes: gid10c950,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,4873305131bf4d94 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,4873305131bf4d94 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 10261c,90121986704b5776 X-Google-Attributes: gid10261c,public X-Google-Thread: fdb77,4873305131bf4d94 X-Google-Attributes: gidfdb77,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,4873305131bf4d94 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public From: seebs@plethora.net (Peter Seebach) Subject: Re: Yet another stupid language war (was: ... the only languages you need!!) Date: 1997/10/30 Message-ID: <63anc7$75p$1@darla.visi.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 286007930 References: <34557f2b.1934172@news.mindspring.com> <3456e71b.3833189@news.mindspring.com> <3458D116.2D34@pseserv3.fw.hac.com> X-Complaints-To: news@visi.com X-Trace: darla.visi.com 878239943 7353 205.166.146.1 (30 Oct 1997 19:32:23 GMT) Organization: Plethora Internet Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.lang.pascal.ansi-iso,comp.lang.pascal.misc Date: 1997-10-30T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <3458D116.2D34@pseserv3.fw.hac.com>, W. Wesley Groleau x4923 wrote: >Consider the languages you are comparing to (see newsgroups line) >that's a pretty ignorant claim. Ada is the most portable of the above >languages. But only to the systems it's available for. If you talk about code being portable to all implementations, great, but there are still systems which have C compilers, but no Ada. >Rarely do I need to change anything in an Ada program >when I change operating systems, CPUs, or compiler vendors. With >C on the other hand, I recently had to track down the new location >of a .h file because the O.S. vendor decided between versions that >they didn't like the path they chose before. (Not only that, but they >changed the return value of sprintf, from the string written in, to >the number of chars written.) You can't have it both ways. The C language, and every implementation of C, has had the same definition of sprintf, and the same locations for all the headers, since 1989. If you want to use compilers for similar languaes, and complain about the portability of C, we get to taunt you about every implementation that's ever claimed to be similar to Ada, too. >Java was intended to be the most portable >of all, but Microsoft is trying hard to prevent that. Java is intended to produce executables and programs which are portable across all implementations; this does not necessarily make it a widely portable language. >C and C++ were partly designed and partly thrown >together to support whatever thing the few people involved thought was >cool at the time. Speak for C++. :) C has a bit of history, but is really fairly consistent. :) -s -- seebs@plethora.net -- Speaking for myself. No spam please. Copyright 1997. All rights reserved. This was not written by my cat. C/Unix wizard - send mail for help! -- - More Net, Less Spam!