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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,56ca6b335f8f1262 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2000-09-01 00:52:44 PST Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!sn-east!supernews.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!warm.news.pipex.net!pipex!news.kvaerner.com!Ian.Whytock@kvaerner.com From: "Tarjei T. Jensen" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Trouble with UNIX IPC and Ada95 Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 09:47:10 +0200 Organization: Kvaerner Group IT Message-ID: <8onmu0$dh75@news.kvaerner.com> References: <8olqhe$hsv$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <39AE7960.D6622FD4@earthlink.net> <8om5tn$q0$1@nnrp1.deja.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 155.209.159.82 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2120.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2120.0 Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:461 Date: 2000-09-01T09:47:10+02:00 List-Id: wv12@my-deja.com wrote >Apparently this is not the case. Twenty years after IBM launches the >IBM PC, you see a myriads of operating systems written in C: MINIX, >XINU, Linux, XENIX, FreeBSD, etc... I haven't seen anything in Ada >on any PC that provides half the functionality of DOS. Maybe there >is a language that makes OS design become a walk in the park. That >language is not Ada. Operating systems are written in other languages than C. OS/400 is supposed to be written in Modula-2. VMS is mostly written in bliss. Other languages are also used including C. Originally plan9 should have been written in modula-2, but Rob Pike decided for an extended C since Ken Thompson was good at writing C compilers. I think he made the wrong trade off. Reducing the work load for Ken Thomson is silly if you can reduce total time used for the entire project. I believe that the popularity of C++ and java reflects the problems real world people have with C. The doctrine says that C++ must be easier than C. Reality is that C++ adds complexity and time. Java is a time saver compared to C++ and possibly C and its popularity reflects that people just do not hack it with C and C++. BTW. Programming in C is fun. It has a absolutely huge tinkering apeal. Because it is fun one tend not to notice that time flies. As a professional I cannot let "fun" decide engineering choices when that choice will incure a large time/cost penalty. If I choose to use C, I do it knowing the problems that follows that choice. The reality of life is that both the C and Unix community is plagued with bad engineering decisions. We all pay for it. Greetings,