Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!hplabs!hpda!hpcupt1!jwolf
From: jwolf@hpcupt1.HP.COM (John Wolf)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.pascal
Subject: Re: C Ternary Conditional Expression?
Message-ID: <7020004@hpcupt1.HP.COM>
Date: 26 May 89 17:24:03 GMT
References: <950025@hpclcdb.HP.COM>
Organization: Hewlett Packard, Cupertino
Lines: 62

I'm not going to get into a discussion of how C or Pascal are
better then each other.  But there are attributes of C which
lend to generation of "more efficient code" (whatever that
means).  To state three: pointer arithmetic, less stingent
type checking and bitwise manipulation.  These attributes 
alone make operating system or low level software development
significantly simpler.  I currently develop low level (O.S.)
software for the hp3000 using a Pascal spinoff.  That is,
the Pascal used is an enhanced Pascal to accomodate the above
stated C attributes among other language shortcomings.
This software engineer and others using Pascal here are 
constantly jumping through hoops and doing contortions
to accomplish what C can do in a single statement.
Here are some other points:

>So why write in the terse C format? I personally think that
>   
>    loop = loop + 1;
On most machines the above statement would generate an Add machine
instrucion...

>is more clear than
>
>    loop += 1;
>
>or the horrendous
>
>    loop++;
when on the same machine a increment machine instruction is generated
for the two above statements which require less CPU cycles then an 
add instruction.
 
>And I despise things like
>
>    y = ++x;
>
>where one has to remember small details (like increment before or after?).
Yes, these can be a tough call.  However, the above C statement doesn't 
require the programmer to know 'x's structure size inorder to increment it,
thanks to C's smart pointer arithmetic.

>(But maybe that, in
>part, is why people like to use C.  It is a specialized, hidden language like
>the Lawyers use to hide or obscure details from "common" people.)
>
This is true, some programmers enjoy writing terse uncomprehensible code
and, there by, cramming two pages of source code into a single page 
using critic C, it's fun.

>All the person writing C has done, then, is to write less clear code in
>fewer lines, often making it harder to understand and maintain later (even
>by the original author, and even if well commented).  
>
If C had interrupt capabilities there would be no need for coding in
assembly.  C provides the flexibility of both creating a high level 
level of abstraction and hugging the paradigm of a given machine -
depending on the skills and preference of the programmer.  For that reason
Programmers eventually leave Pascal behind with the educators for C because 
C's inherent freedom of expression.

Just an opinion, please don't flame
John Wolf / X74682 47UP E6 / jwolf@hpda.HP.COM