Article View: comp.lang.modula2
Article #2541Re: Report on defect in M2 vs C (Was Modula-2, Modula-3, C or C++)
From: Paul A Vixie
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 16:25
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 16:25
35 lines
2848 bytes
2848 bytes
>The Modula-n programming languages are pretty good. However, they suffer >in their Pascal heritage. The C-type syntax is much more concise and >consistent (no flames please). What the world needs is a language that >offers both simplicity and elegance, along with the ability to >self-organize and self-document (code, that is). Is it time for a D >programming language? From this paragraph I will guess that you are imputing Modula-3's capabilities by remembering Modula-2's and then fudging a bit. If you look at Modula-3's type system you will find it far more consistent than C's. As for conciseness, well, "typedef int (*foo)(int, int)" may be concise but it's not what I'd call a model of clarity. Modula-3's chief objective -- which it achieves nicely -- is that code written in it (including arbitrarily complex data structures) tends to look like what it does/is. (Not to mention that Modula-3 code that compiles will tend to work -- whereas C will compile many kinds of line noise and generate pseudorandom object code for you.) The operative question is not yet "which language is better" but rather, "what attributes make a language better or worse than another?" To professional programmers who work on huge projects as part of distributed teams full of non- wizards, a language that looks like what it does, has very strict compile-time rules, has some run-time rules and has explicit module interdependencies, will seem like a better language than one which gives programmers a lot of power and flexibility. Garage band programmers will tend to prefer the power and flex. The error which underlies the very existence of this debate is that there is some kind of perfect Platonic form of the computer language, which some real languages reflect more perfectly than others. Plato was brilliant for his time but reality is not expressable in terms of arbitrary visions of perfection, and furthermore, one programmer's ideal is often another's hell. -- Paul Vixie La Honda, CA "Illegitimi non carborundum." <paul@vix.com> pacbell!vixie!paul (dont let the bastards grind you down)
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<VIXIE.95Sep26092506@wisdom.vix.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!nnrp.vix.com!vixieReferences:
<438nkr$bd@classic.eng.octel.com> <4395o4$3mv2@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net> <DAGENAIS.95Sep22100113@gutrune.vlsi.polymtl.ca> <DFI1rr.LyC@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca> <Pine.SUN.3.91.950926031537.27808B-100000@napier.uwaterloo.ca>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!nnrp.vix.com!vixie From: vixie@vix.com (Paul A Vixie) Newsgroups: comp.lang.modula2,comp.lang.modula3,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Report on defect in M2 vs C (Was Modula-2, Modula-3, C or C++) Date: 26 Sep 1995 16:25:06 GMT Organization: Vixie Enterprises Message-ID: <VIXIE.95Sep26092506@wisdom.vix.com> References: <438nkr$bd@classic.eng.octel.com> <4395o4$3mv2@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net> <DAGENAIS.95Sep22100113@gutrune.vlsi.polymtl.ca> <DFI1rr.LyC@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca> <Pine.SUN.3.91.950926031537.27808B-100000@napier.uwaterloo.ca> NNTP-Posting-Host: wisdom.home.vix.com In-reply-to: Viet-Trung Luu's message of Tue, 26 Sep 1995 07:23:39 GMT