On Tue, Mar 03, 2015 at 10:07:41PM -0500, Hendrik Boom wrote:

[cut]

> > It can be discussed
> > > wether the choice makes sense, but I don't see even why C should
> > > always be considered.
> > >
> > >
> > Efficiency and guaranteed portability, Diedler. You can't say the same
> > of Python, Perl, etc - because in order to use them, you have to
> > compile them from C first.
>
> Case study above, Scheme was clearly superior to C. Granted, Scheme
> code did get compiled to C, but what I care about here is the code the
> human programmers see.
>

Without entering a religious war about languages, similar examples
exist about using Erlang or Haskell instead of legacy C code. For some
specific tasks (but honestly not always) these languages can
outperform C implementations, in a much shorter time than that needed
to get a brand-new and better-conceived C implementation of the same
thing. And both Erlang and Haskell are portable on a large variety of
platforms.

Again, the world is not just black or white when it comes to languages
(of any kind) :)

My2Cents

KatolaZ

--
[ Enzo Nicosia aka KatolaZ --- GLUG Catania -- Freaknet Medialab ]
[ me [at] katolaz.homeunix.net -- http://katolaz.homeunix.net -- ]
[ GNU/Linux User:#325780/ICQ UIN: #258332181/GPG key ID 0B5F062F ]
[ Fingerprint: 8E59 D6AA 445E FDB4 A153 3D5A 5F20 B3AE 0B5F 062F ]