Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/3/84; site aplvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!mcnc!decvax!decuac!aplvax!ded
From: ded@aplvax.UUCP (Don E. Davis)
Newsgroups: net.unix
Subject: Re: Unix and user friendy systems
Message-ID: <865@aplvax.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 30-May-85 08:19:13 EDT
Article-I.D.: aplvax.865
Posted: Thu May 30 08:19:13 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 1-Jun-85 04:01:39 EDT
References: <11048@brl-tgr.ARPA> <1463@utah-gr.UUCP> <335@brl-sem.ARPA>
Reply-To: ded@aplvax.UUCP (Don E. Davis)
Organization: JHU/Applied Physics Lab, Laurel, MD
Lines: 28

In article <335@brl-sem.ARPA> abc@brl-sem writes:
>Perhaps the controversy over whom and/or for what source code
>is written merely illuminates the <true> heresy that "C" is
>not the ultimate programming language.

No reasonable person would claim that "C" is the "ultimate programming 
language" because no such thing exists.  Every language has its strong 
points and weak points; every language does some things 
well and some things poorly.  This rabid C programmer is quite willing
to admit that the wretched Pascal is better suited for some projects 
than C.  Ditto with Lisp and Forth and <put your favorite language here>.
C's strength lies in that fact that it does just about everything
reasonably well.  It allows the programmer to get right down into the 
metal like an assembly language while simultaneously soaring aloft on 
the wings of an HOL.

C is the ultimate MULTIPURPOSE programming language.  If I were restricted
to one and only one language I would pick C without hesitation.  And in fact,
I choose C for 90% of my programming projects.  But I have written
in Pascal and Lisp and other languages when the needs of the project dictated
that choice.

-- 

					Don Davis
					JHU/APL
				...decvax!harpo!seismo!umcp-cs!aplvax!ded
				...rlgvax!cvl!umcp-cs!aplvax!ded