Re: Modula-2, Modula-3, C or C++

Article View: comp.lang.modula2

Article #2509

#2509

From: halasz
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 1995 02:42

7 lines
813 bytes

In article <BLUME.95Sep18161301@dynastar.cs.princeton.edu>, blume@dynastar.cs.princeton.edu (Matthias Blume) writes
+ ....
+ Aside from that I still disagree with you:  a programming language
+ should not specify low-level things like memory layout in its
+ definition.

But that language is not C

Technical Details

Message-ID: <43lam8$40q@caip.rutgers.edu>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!caip.rutgers.edu!not-for-mail

References: <438nkr$bd@classic.eng.octel.com> <4395o4$3mv2@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net> <BLUME.95Sep18161301@dynastar.cs.princeton.edu>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!caip.rutgers.edu!not-for-mail
From: halasz@caip.rutgers.edu
Newsgroups: comp.lang.modula2,comp.lang.modula3,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Modula-2, Modula-3, C or C++
Followup-To: comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++
Date: 18 Sep 1995 22:42:16 -0400
Organization: Rutgers University
Message-ID: <43lam8$40q@caip.rutgers.edu>
References: <438nkr$bd@classic.eng.octel.com> <4395o4$3mv2@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net> <BLUME.95Sep18161301@dynastar.cs.princeton.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: caip.rutgers.edu

Reply to Parent Message