Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!uwm.edu!wuarchive!sdd.hp.com!samsung!olivea!mintaka!bloom-beacon!eru!hagbard!sunic!mcsun!ukc!edcastle!aipdc
From: aipdc@castle.ed.ac.uk (Paul Crowley)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: low level optimization
Message-ID: <9728@castle.ed.ac.uk>
Date: 20 Apr 91 18:31:53 GMT
References: <21660@lanl.gov> <15881@smoke.brl.mil> <21815@lanl.gov>
Organization: Put your analyst on danger money, baby!
Lines: 16

In article <21815@lanl.gov> jlg@cochiti.lanl.gov (Jim Giles) writes:
>I would have made the same comment if I had been comparing C to _any_
>well designed language (Pascal, Ada, Scheme, ...).

C is bad. Therefore Pascal is good.

Pass the sick bag.

Actually, why is it that reading comp.lang.c is the one thing sure to
put me off C and start me looking for a language that I like?  I keep
telling people it's possible to program well, and even to prove your
programs, in C, but the more I read this group the less sure I get. 
Aren't there any good languages out there?
                                         ____
\/ o\ Paul Crowley aipdc@castle.ed.ac.uk \  /
/\__/ Part straight. Part gay. All queer. \/