Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!hc!lanl!jlg
From: jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Just Wondering
Message-ID: <12666@lanl.gov>
Date: 26 Apr 89 00:14:57 GMT
References: <17736@cisunx.UUCP>
Distribution: na
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
Lines: 26

From article <17736@cisunx.UUCP>, by jcbst3@cisunx.UUCP (James C. Benz):
> In article <12564@lanl.gov> jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) writes:
>>Fortunately, for both these cases, C has yet to become a really common
>>language in the big computer environment.  
> 
> Geez, where you been for the last ten years, Rip Van?

I have found that there are definitely _better_ languages in the world
than C.  Some, like Fortran, are only better for certain applications.
Others are better than C in almost _every_ respect, like Modula2-3 or
even ADA.  There are, of course, derivatives of C itself that are
uniformly better than C - like C++, and Objective C is better than
that but not widely available yet.

I usually don't switch to a language simply because it's trendy.  That
seems to me to be the only reason to switch to C (it also seems to be
the general idea behind your: "last ten years, Rip Van?).  Not even at
home on my personal computer - there I prefer SmallTalk for playing with
algorithms and Modula2 for programs which need to be small/fast.  I have,
of course, used C - I even wrote an interpreter at home for it (just to
get a better feel for the language) - the more I learn about it, the less
I like it.

So, I say again: Fortunately C has yet to become a really common
language in the big computer environment - or I would be _forced_
to use it as part of my job.