Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!dsinc!ub!jung From: jung@einstein.physics.buffalo.edu (Alexander Jung) Newsgroups: comp.sys.acorn Subject: Re: Languages Message-ID: <59196@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU> Date: 12 Feb 91 00:13:13 GMT References: <2282@cybaswan.UUCP> <5046@acorn.co.uk> <1991Feb9.075251.16439@rtf.bt.co.uk> <1991Feb10.180855.17062@cns.umist.ac.uk> Sender: news@acsu.Buffalo.EDU Reply-To: jung@einstein.physics.buffalo.edu Organization: SUNY Buffalo, Physics Department Lines: 81 Nntp-Posting-Host: autarch.acsu.buffalo.edu Originator: jung@autarch.acsu.buffalo.edu In article <1991Feb10.180855.17062@cns.umist.ac.uk>, rogersh%t1a@uk.ac.man.cs writes: |> [cited stuff deleted] |> Complete nonsense - Pascal is far more similar to C than BASIC. |> Pascal & C are block structured, BASIC isn't. BASIC isn't actually |> structured at all! Pascal & C are typed, BASIC isn't (at least not |> much). Furthermore C is far more productive than either precisely |> because it is terse and packs more power into each line of source |> code. Also I could mention the preprocessor and the fact |> that the language of *choice* in almost all commercial systems |> software is C. BASIC is good for quick hacks and fast turnaround. Pascal |> is good for beginners (it is a teaching language after all), but if |> you want the real McCoy, C is the only solution. Lack of casting in Pascal |> is one very good reason for preferring C over Pascal. Vastly superior |> I/O and standard libraries is another. |> [more on superiority of C vs. BASIC & rest of the world, also cut out] Ok, before the holly war on programming languages starts up on this newsgroup also, I'd like to add my 0.02 $US: I like Basic on my arch because it keeps programs small and simple (yeah, I know the Interpreter chews up some ROMspace, but even with this in account the programs written in Basic are most of the time smaller than compiled C-programs with their sources). Another (old)point is that the turnaround time for basic is even with a SCSI-disc not compareable to C (takes about 1 min to compile an average sized prog). I could not find any real superior construct in C (apart from strong typing) that is not included in Basic V. But now closer to the points you make: - you claim that Basic is not structured at all; this is true for some old standards (see C 64), but no longer for Basic V, which has all tha capabilities of a modern structured language (do, while , repeat until, Proc, Functions, local Variables...) - you say C ''is far more productive than either precisely because it is terse and packs more power into each line of source code.`` I do not think that this packing is the very best thing since bread in slices, mainly because a normal human being can't understand a real packed line of source code after three weeks, and the compiler can't anyway (i.e. has no special optimisations for tense lines) - you say ''that the language of *choice* in almost all commercial systems software is C.`` This is true, but Cobol is also the language of choice for most comecial people.... - you say ''Strong typing - yes. Strong typing without the ability to cast between these types - no thanks.'' I can not really follow this argument, since the only place I need casting in my C programs is for constants or in system programming, which I prefer to do in assambler. - you claim ''The great advantage of C is it's *lack* of built in rubbish. All the i/o etc. is in standard libraries, reducing the load image size of programs which don't need (or want) a pile of utility functions linked in.`` I have not seen any linker on the arch that does that (picking funktions out of libraries), the only one I know of (hi acorn) links the whole library to the code, so this goes down the street... - (last one) you state ''Absolute not true - compiled BASIC is only a tenth the speed of efficiently written compiled C, and 1/12 that of raw ARM code.`` I don't write the speed dependent parts of my programs in any high level language (apart from some pseudo code I use for structuring), but right down in Assembler, but compared to other machines this Basic is really fast enough (faster than Turbo C on a 25MHz 386 ....) (Hope my quoting technique is not to weird) ---------------------------------------------------------- Alexander Jung (temporary at Buffalo, N.Y.) jung@einstein.physics.buffalo.edu ---------------------------------------------------------- Famous last words: 1) "Don't worry, I can handle it." 2) "You and what army?" 3) "If you were as smart as you think you are, you wouldn't be a cop." -- ---------------------------------------------------------- Alexander Jung (temporary at Buffalo, N.Y.) jung@einstein.physics.buffalo.edu ----------------------------------------------------------