Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!bony1!richieb
From: richieb@bony1.bony.com (Richard Bielak)
Newsgroups: comp.object
Subject: Re: programming quality vs. language
Message-ID: <1991Apr10.135412.5096@bony1.bony.com>
Date: 10 Apr 91 13:54:12 GMT
References: <20176@alice.att.com>
Reply-To: richieb@bony1.UUCP (Richard Bielak)
Organization: Bank of New York
Lines: 26

In article <20176@alice.att.com> ark@alice.att.com (Andrew Koenig) writes:

[...]
>
>In other words: cheap compilers are used by random hackers, expensive
>ones by professionals.  I would expect this to be true regardless
>of the merits of the languages themselves.
>-- 

It ain't necessarily so :-). We've used a $200 Modula-2 compiler to
write hundreds of thousands of code that moves a lot of money around
(on the average sixty billion dollars a day - that's BILLIONS with a
"b"). 

We used that compiler, because we thought Modula-2 was a better
language than PASCAL or C. After 6 years we are still using Modula-2,
and we are very happy with our decision.

...richie


-- 
*-----------------------------------------------------------------------------*
| Richie Bielak  (212)-815-3072    | Programs are like baby squirrels. Once   |
| Internet:      richieb@bony.com  | you pick one up and handle it, you can't |
| Bang:       uunet!bony1!richieb  | put it back. The mother won't feed it.   |