Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!think.com!hsdndev!cmcl2!kramden.acf.nyu.edu!brnstnd
From: brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: On whether C has first-class composable functions
Message-ID: <15169:Feb1009:57:1091@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>
Date: 10 Feb 91 09:57:10 GMT
References: <1991Feb6.161639.18311@spool.cs.wisc.edu> <12547:Feb621:05:4491@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <21642@yunexus.YorkU.CA>
Organization: IR
Lines: 24

In article <21642@yunexus.YorkU.CA> oz@yunexus.yorku.ca (Ozan Yigit) writes:
> No, they were not C functions, therefore unlike other attempts, they were
> [and still are] irrelevant to the discussion.

Ah. Someone with a name you might recognize posted a C++ solution near
the beginning of this discussion. His composable functions were not C
functions, so you are saying that his solution was irrelevant.

> We have noted that by that amusing re-definition,
> C ``has'' Fortran.

Fortran is not a semantic feature. It is a computer language.

Your notes have been exceedingly repetitious, largely incorrect, and
insulting to (among other people) the man who designed C++. I don't
think that anyone wants to associate himself with your royal ``we.''

I want this group to be a useful source of technical information,
not boring arguments. But I haven't seen a new observation in this
discussion for more than a week. So I'm giving up on this thread, and I
suggest that others do likewise. It's not my problem if Ozan wants to
continue tossing insults at Bell Labs language designers.

---Dan