14 Oct
2011
14 Oct
'11
6:28 a.m.
On 14/10/11 2:37 AM, Pontus Pihlgren wrote:
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 05:50:54PM -0700, Chuck Guzis
wrote:
While some disagree with the "portable assembler" characterisation, at
C's level, it is indeed a language for micromanagers. Many people don't
seem to appreciate that it's not ideal for most problems above the
infrastructural/system level. It can't hurt to learn it but it can hurt
to use it for the wrong problems (applies equally to C++).*
An analogy may help. If your problem is "a room for the night,"
sometimes it's better not to begin by digging the foundations for a hotel.?
--Toby
(longtime C programmer)
* - don't make it your go-to language! (har har)
? - I'm sure the same arguments were made against *assembler* while C
became popular (during 1980s).
Yes, I know--and have known this for at least 30
years, when Dennis
pointed it out. C started off as a sort of "cheap and dirty in leiu
of assembly" language.
This reminds me of the quote in my .plan:
"Some people seem to think that C is a real programming language, but
they are sadly mistaken. It really is about writing almost-portable
assembly language" -- Linus Torvalds
For me, that is a spot on description of what C is.
/P