Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!apple!vsi1!zorch!ditka!qiclab!m2xenix!randy
From: randy@m2xenix.psg.com (Randy Bush)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.modula2
Subject: Re: Modula-2, get real.
Message-ID: <1990Jun15.053906.3944@m2xenix.psg.com>
Date: 15 Jun 90 05:39:06 GMT
References: <5385.2673196E@puddle.fidonet.org> <729.267677b4@waikato.ac.nz>
Organization: Pacific Systems Group, Portland Oregon US
Lines: 25

[flame]

In article <729.267677b4@waikato.ac.nz> ccc_ldo@waikato.ac.nz (Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Waikato University) writes:
> I do not agree that a minimum specification for doing I/O, or heap
> management, or concurrency, or anything else that requires run-time library
> support, should be part of the definition of a systems-level programming
> language.

So where were you when we needed you at the ISO working group?

> Such specifications are usually more trouble than they're worth.

You forgot to underline 'more' and put a strong adjective in front of it.

> Consider the "portable" C I/O library

I have.  At the recent Modula-2 ISO meeting, I came to the conclusion that we
should have just added C's stdio etc. to the SYSTEM module.  It's existing
practice, available everywhere, and would probably get more user satisfaction
than anything a committee could design in five years.

[emalf]

-- 
..!{uunet,qiclab,intelhf}!m2xenix!randy   randy@psg.com   randy@m2xenix.uucp