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: 10d15b,328622178ec8b832 X-Google-Attributes: gid10d15b,public X-Google-Thread: 1094ba,a03ae7f4e53958e1 X-Google-Attributes: gid1094ba,public X-Google-Thread: 111d6b,328622178ec8b832 X-Google-Attributes: gid111d6b,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,8775b19e3c68a5dc X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,a03ae7f4e53958e1 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,a03ae7f4e53958e1 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 114809,a03ae7f4e53958e1 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public From: "James Giles" Subject: Re: Which language pays most 17457 -- C++ vs. Java? Date: 1997/12/19 Message-ID: <67dc5k$o02@mtinsc04.worldnet.att.net>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 308531840 References: <199712121931.LAA25389@sirius.infonex.com> <349745D3.F4AA0460@seasoned-software.com> <34994D43.6858@ici.net> <01bd0c0b$53cc1860$26db45cf@juddesk> <67ccvl$iqj$1@darla.visi.com> <67comb$94o@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net> <3498B5A6.C404C703@seasoned-software.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3 Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.misc,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.fortran,comp.lang.cobol,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-12-19T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: steve wrote in message <3498B5A6.C404C703@seasoned-software.com>... ... >ACTUALLY, Linux itself, and many programs, are SYSTEMS code! Some >features can't or shouldn't be used, and it is ALWAYS more prone to >errors. It surprises me how well Linux generally runs, and rarely >crashes! An interesting attitude. The system is the one component of the programming environment that everyone *must* use every time they use the computer. It *should* be the most robust, efiicient, and secure piece of code on the machine. The attitude that it needn't be seems to be a UNIXism. To be sure, pre-UNIX systems had security an reliability problems (they were trying to make general purpose use of hardware we would now consider inadequate to run a toaster). There's no excuse for this attitude today - except that the vendors of systems have noticed that UNIX never failed in popularity because of these weaknesses. Bill Gates owes a lot to UNIX, if nothing else: for the pervasiveness of the attitude that the system *needn't* be secure, robust, and efficient. ... >How many C programmers learned ONLY C? I doubt that it is very many. Well, you're welcome to your perceptions. I'd guess that only about 1 in 10 C (C++, maybe Java, etc...) programmers I've ever met had any real substantial experience with any language outside that group. Unless you count AWK or SED as real languages! Yet those with the least knowlwdge of other languages are always the quickest to dismiss languages with pat excuses ("Ada is too big", well it's smaller than C++ and more cleanly designed - "Fortran makes you use GOTOs all the time", well it has all the "structured" flow control of any other language and actually restricts the use of GOTO more than C does - etc...). Now, among other things, I have in the past provided on-site maintenence for C compilers at a national laboratory. I dealt with C programmers from around the world and at a time when they could *not* claim that the language never caused them any problems: when they had a bug they couldn't identify or fix. So, while your perception may be different than mine, I'll still claim that mine is at least as valid. I'll say one thing, C programmers are extremely loyal: they always accept the blame for their bugs. Even when it's a kind of bug I see often in C programs and almost never in any other language, they don't blame the language. -- J. Giles Ricercar Software