Re: Report on defect in M2 vs C (Was Modula-2, Modula-3, C or C++)

Article View: comp.lang.modula2

Article #2565

#2565

From: Bob Kitzberger
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 1995 22:02

16 lines
1419 bytes

Viet-Trung Luu (vluu@napier.uwaterloo.ca) wrote:

: 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).

Come on.  You can't post something so blatantly arguable as "C-type
syntax is much more concise" and then ask for no flames.  Your
argument revolves around your idealization of C syntax; if someone
can't attack that, then they can't attack your argument.

Also, I don't buy the part about C "being more powerful".  No flames
please ;-)

--
Bob Kitzberger	      Rational Software Corporation       rlk@rational.com

Technical Details

Message-ID: <44hqcv$lhv@rational.rational.com>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!rational.com!rlk

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>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!rational.com!rlk
From: rlk@pelton (Bob Kitzberger)
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++)
Followup-To: comp.lang.modula2,comp.lang.modula3,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.ada
Date: 29 Sep 1995 22:02:07 GMT
Organization: Rational Software Corporation
Message-ID: <44hqcv$lhv@rational.rational.com>
References: <438nkr$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: pelton.rational.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Reply to Parent Message