Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register

Groups > comp.lang.misc > #11790

Re: Alternatives to C (was Re: Safety of casting from 'long' to 'int')

From John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com>
Newsgroups comp.lang.misc, comp.lang.c
Subject Re: Alternatives to C (was Re: Safety of casting from 'long' to 'int')
Date 2026-05-12 15:28 -0700
Organization A place where nothing fits quite right
Message-ID <20260512152853.0000547e@gmail.com> (permalink)
References (3 earlier) <10tpt9j$c3i4$1@dont-email.me> <10tpvqv$ivo$3@reader1.panix.com> <10ttvng$1j579$1@dont-email.me> <10tu082$1irrv$2@kst.eternal-september.org> <10u069d$285sv$1@dont-email.me>

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On Tue, 12 May 2026 22:32:30 +0100
Bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:

> Even half a century ago, there were big companies and lots of clever
> people, who could have cranked out a suitable systems language of
> equal capability to C in their sleep, but with fewer rough edges.
> 
> I wonder why they didn't?

I am reminded of Seymour Cray's rebuttal to Tom Watson:

"I understand that in the laboratory developing this system there are
only 34 people, 'including the janitor.' Of these, 14 are engineers and
4 are programmers, and only one has a Ph. D., a relatively junior
programmer. To the outsider, the laboratory appeared to be cost
conscious, hard working and highly motivated.

Contrasting this modest effort with our own vast development
activities, I fail to understand why we have lost our industry
leadership position by letting someone else offer the world’s most
powerful computer."

"It seems like Mr. Watson has answered his own question."

Back to comp.lang.misc | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Alternatives to C (was Re: Safety of casting from 'long' to 'int') cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-05-10 13:05 +0000
  Re: Alternatives to C (was Re: Safety of casting from 'long' to 'int') Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-05-12 02:28 +0100
    Re: Alternatives to C (was Re: Safety of casting from 'long' to 'int') Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-05-11 18:37 -0700
      Re: Alternatives to C (was Re: Safety of casting from 'long' to 'int') Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-05-12 22:32 +0100
        Re: Alternatives to C (was Re: Safety of casting from 'long' to 'int') John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-05-12 15:28 -0700
          Re: Alternatives to C (was Re: Safety of casting from 'long' to 'int') Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-05-13 02:49 +0200
        Re: Alternatives to C (was Re: Safety of casting from 'long' to 'int') scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-05-12 23:21 +0000
          Re: Alternatives to C (was Re: Safety of casting from 'long' to 'int') Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-05-13 02:53 +0200
            Re: Alternatives to C (was Re: Safety of casting from 'long' to 'int') scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-05-13 14:15 +0000
              Re: Alternatives to C (was Re: Safety of casting from 'long' to 'int') Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-05-13 12:30 -0700
                Re: Alternatives to C (was Re: Safety of casting from 'long' to 'int') cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-05-13 20:20 +0000
    Re: Alternatives to C (was Re: Safety of casting from 'long' to 'int') cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-05-12 02:40 +0000
      Re: Alternatives to C (was Re: Safety of casting from 'long' to 'int') Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-05-12 15:11 +0100

csiph-web