From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Kastrup Subject: Re: [OT] Re: C++ *for Git* Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2007 11:42:54 +0200 Message-ID: <856421ra3l.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> References: <46F5318A.4030103@krose.org> <877imishdp.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <46F55E03.2040404@krose.org> <5e4707340709221550o6d0a6062qd51c16a278727c29@mail.gmail.com> <20070923020951.GF24423@planck.djpig.de> <20070923062527.GA8979@old.davidb.org> <851wcpsv4z.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: "Frank Lichtenheld" , "Alex Unleashed" , "Kyle Rose" , "Miles Bader" , "Dmitry Kakurin" , Git To: "Marco Costalba" X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Sep 23 11:43:27 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1IZNza-0006ye-IV for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sun, 23 Sep 2007 11:43:10 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753561AbXIWJnF (ORCPT ); Sun, 23 Sep 2007 05:43:05 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753472AbXIWJnD (ORCPT ); Sun, 23 Sep 2007 05:43:03 -0400 Received: from mail-in-09.arcor-online.net ([151.189.21.49]:58979 "EHLO mail-in-09.arcor-online.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750753AbXIWJnC (ORCPT ); Sun, 23 Sep 2007 05:43:02 -0400 Received: from mail-in-06-z2.arcor-online.net (mail-in-06-z2.arcor-online.net [151.189.8.18]) by mail-in-09.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A01E303299; Sun, 23 Sep 2007 11:43:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-in-09.arcor-online.net (mail-in-09.arcor-online.net [151.189.21.49]) by mail-in-06-z2.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16A7D5C0C5; Sun, 23 Sep 2007 11:43:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: from lola.goethe.zz (dslb-084-061-000-085.pools.arcor-ip.net [84.61.0.85]) by mail-in-09.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD4A434A6BE; Sun, 23 Sep 2007 11:42:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: by lola.goethe.zz (Postfix, from userid 1002) id 736991C1F3DC; Sun, 23 Sep 2007 11:42:54 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: (Marco Costalba's message of "Sun\, 23 Sep 2007 11\:29\:45 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1.50 (gnu/linux) X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.91.2/4364/Sun Sep 23 01:59:34 2007 on mail-in-09.arcor-online.net X-Virus-Status: Clean Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: "Marco Costalba" writes: > On 9/23/07, David Kastrup wrote: >> David Brown writes: >> >> > On Sun, Sep 23, 2007 at 04:09:51AM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: >> >>On Sun, Sep 23, 2007 at 12:50:00AM +0200, Alex Unleashed wrote: >> >>> I'd say being forced to be explicit is a good thing here, so that the >> >>> programmer at least has some sort of good understanding of what is >> >>> going on, and chances are that if he doesn't really know, things just >> >>> won't work out (quite unlike a lot of other languages where this >> >>> programmer might actually end up with something half-assed that >> >>> "mostly" works). >> >>> For some reason it seems to me a lot harder to find bad programmers >> >>> surviving using C than a lot of the other languages. >> >> > > Well, according to your reasoning Who is "you"? You are replying to a post of mine, yet commenting on Alex. > assembly should be the gotha of elite programmers, only very > disciplined and meticulous programmers survive, much more then in C. I am neither disciplined nor meticulous, yet have designed and programmed applications and complete systems in assembly language. Programmers can easily survive assembly language without being disciplined or meticulous. Their projects can't: they get tied to the programmers. Porting an assembly language application to a different processor might be easier than porting it to another programmer. > Is this a good way to measure a language? It is a good way to measure programmers, at least concerning some interesting metrics. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum