Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!uwmcsd1!ig!agate!saturn!chromo!joseph From: joseph@chromo.ucsc.edu (Joseph Reger) Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: Third public review of X3J11 C Summary: YARO (Yet Another Ridiculous Opinion) Message-ID: <4628@saturn.ucsc.edu> Date: 26 Aug 88 21:04:43 GMT References: <8365@smoke.ARPA> <225800053@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu> <8374@smoke.ARPA> <509@accelerator.eng.ohio-state.edu> <891@l.cc.purdue.edu> <4203@adobe.COM> Sender: usenet@saturn.ucsc.edu Reply-To: joseph@chromo.ucsc.edu (Joseph Reger) Organization: Physics Department, University of California, Santa Cruz Lines: 36 In article <4203@adobe.COM> burgett@steel.UUCP (Michael Burgett) writes: >These discussions about the flaws of the C language in dealing with complex >floating point ops, and the *failure* of X3J11 to solicit input and rectify >these things are getting _old_.... > >1) C is not now, has not been in the past, and (hopefully) will not be in >the future, a lanugage designed for writing scientific applications >..... >In light of 1 & 2... where's the beef? C is doing what it is designed to do, >and from what I've seen of the ANSI standard, will continue to do so. My hat >off to the committee for not bowing to public pressure to try to make C all >things to all people (can you say PL/1... I knew you could.) > > mike burgett burgett!adobe@decwrl.dec.com > >"my intellectual work belongs to my employer, but my flames are my own..." ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ And they are nothing to be proud of! Mr. burgett sounds like if he had had invented the language C, and as if he were the only authority to decide just who is permitted to use it. The humble proposition was to make a _few_ changes that would _not_ make the language more complex, or bigger or more difficult to implement or whatever the usual "arguments" against these are. I am pulling out from this debate now and just would like to comment that it is ending yet another time where it sadly usually does: "Scien- tist go home, you buggers program in YOUR language not in OURS." I thank all of you who sent me e-mail on this topic (none of which was like Mr. burgett's above piece). I will continue to use C as long as the standard does not require the implementors to code special "Scientific Application Detectors" (SAD) into it, which would produce erroneous code if the probability of scien- tific use exceeds a certain value. Joseph D. Reger, joseph@chromo.ucsc.edu