Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #215469 > unrolled thread

“A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C

Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers

Contents

  “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2020-12-12 19:46 -0700
    Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2020-12-13 08:07 +0000
    Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> - 2020-12-13 14:49 +0000
      Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C Dallas <dallas@texas.usa> - 2020-12-14 13:30 -0600
        Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> - 2020-12-14 15:00 -0500
          Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2020-12-14 21:13 +0000
          Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C Dallas <dallas@texas.usa> - 2020-12-14 16:58 -0600
            Re: origins of C Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2020-12-14 16:23 -0700
              Re: origins of C Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2020-12-15 21:54 -0600
                Re: origins of C Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2020-12-16 07:19 -0700
                  Re: origins of C Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2020-12-16 16:06 +0000
                    Re: origins of C scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2020-12-16 17:17 +0000
                    Re: origins of C Niklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se> - 2020-12-17 13:02 +0000
                  Re: origins of C Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2020-12-19 18:39 +0000
              Re: standard mania, was origins of C John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2020-12-16 18:25 +0000
            Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2020-12-19 18:26 +0000
              Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2020-12-19 18:47 +0000
              Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2020-12-19 14:46 -0500
                Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2020-12-20 16:14 +0000
                  Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2020-12-20 11:29 -0500
              Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C Dallas <dallas@texas.usa> - 2020-12-20 08:57 -0600
                Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> - 2020-12-20 10:43 -0500
                  Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2020-12-20 16:38 +0000
                    Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> - 2020-12-20 11:54 -0500
                      Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2020-12-21 18:13 +0000
                        Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> - 2020-12-21 13:37 -0500
                          Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2020-12-21 16:01 -0500
                            Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> - 2020-12-21 16:03 -0500
                              Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2020-12-22 19:05 +0000
                                Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> - 2020-12-22 14:13 -0500
                                  Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2020-12-22 21:55 +0000
                                  Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2020-12-22 21:58 +0000
                  Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2020-12-20 17:04 +0000
                    Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> - 2020-12-20 13:19 -0500
                      Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2020-12-20 18:40 +0000
                      Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2020-12-20 14:03 -0500
                        Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> - 2020-12-20 18:09 -0500
                          Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2020-12-21 08:11 +0000
                            Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2020-12-22 10:39 -0700
                          Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2020-12-21 17:33 +0000
                        Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2020-12-20 17:35 -0700
                  Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2020-12-21 18:10 +0000
                    Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> - 2020-12-21 13:23 -0500
                      Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2020-12-21 13:37 -0500
                        Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2020-12-22 18:59 +0000
                          Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> - 2020-12-22 14:23 -0500
                    Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2020-12-21 19:31 +0000
        Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2020-12-14 20:17 +0000
        Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C maus <maus@dmaus.org> - 2020-12-14 21:24 +0000
          Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2020-12-14 19:30 -0500
            Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> - 2020-12-14 21:06 -0500
    Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C maus <maus@dmaus.org> - 2020-12-14 19:08 +0000
    Re: “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C Robin Vowels <robin.vowels@gmail.com> - 2021-02-10 07:42 -0800

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

#215469 — “A damn stupid thing to do”—the origins of C

https://apple.news/A_-wNCMkYTUqUYmLw17kK-A


-- 
Pete

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#215478

On Sun, 2020-12-13, Peter Flass wrote:
> https://apple.news/A_-wNCMkYTUqUYmLw17kK-A

Aka <https://arstechnica.com/features/2020/12/a-damn-stupid-thing-to-do-the-origins-of-c/>

The first half is about CPL, the next 1/4 about BCPL, then B and C at
Bell Labs.  I should read it, but I need to wrap christmas gifts
... and solve adventofcode.com/2020/ puzzles in C++.

Thanks!

/Jorgen

-- 
  // Jorgen Grahn <grahn@  Oo  o.   .     .
\X/     snipabacken.se>   O  o   .

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#215480

On Sat, 12 Dec 2020 19:46:16 -0700, Peter Flass wrote:

> https://apple.news/A_-wNCMkYTUqUYmLw17kK-A

I have actually met David Barron on a number of occasions. I have had 
dinner with David Wheeler several times. When I went up to Martin 
Campbell-Kelly (who I had admired for years) at a meeting a couple of 
years ago, I was gobsmacked to find out that he already knew who *I* was! 
I have had a lot of contact with Martin Richards (I used to run a BCPL 
user group).

And I met Ritchie and Thompson once, briefly.

This is all quite worrying as some of them are now dead.
-- 
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
 http://www.mirrorservice.org

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#215490

On 12/13/2020 8:49 AM, Bob Eager wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Dec 2020 19:46:16 -0700, Peter Flass wrote:
> 
>> https://apple.news/A_-wNCMkYTUqUYmLw17kK-A
> 
> I have actually met David Barron on a number of occasions. I have had
> dinner with David Wheeler several times. When I went up to Martin
> Campbell-Kelly (who I had admired for years) at a meeting a couple of
> years ago, I was gobsmacked to find out that he already knew who *I* was!
> I have had a lot of contact with Martin Richards (I used to run a BCPL
> user group).
> 
> And I met Ritchie and Thompson once, briefly.
> 
> This is all quite worrying as some of them are now dead.
> 

I remember when Dennis Ritchie would post on the newsgroup comp.lang.c

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#215491

Dallas <dallas@texas.usa> writes:

> On 12/13/2020 8:49 AM, Bob Eager wrote:
>> On Sat, 12 Dec 2020 19:46:16 -0700, Peter Flass wrote:
>> 
>>> https://apple.news/A_-wNCMkYTUqUYmLw17kK-A
>> I have actually met David Barron on a number of occasions. I have
>> had
>> dinner with David Wheeler several times. When I went up to Martin
>> Campbell-Kelly (who I had admired for years) at a meeting a couple of
>> years ago, I was gobsmacked to find out that he already knew who *I* was!
>> I have had a lot of contact with Martin Richards (I used to run a BCPL
>> user group).
>> And I met Ritchie and Thompson once, briefly.
>> This is all quite worrying as some of them are now dead.
>
> I remember when Dennis Ritchie would post on the newsgroup comp.lang.c

Sort of gives him an air of authority.
He posted here many times.

-- 
Dan Espen

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#215493

Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> writes:
>Dallas <dallas@texas.usa> writes:
>
>> On 12/13/2020 8:49 AM, Bob Eager wrote:
>>> On Sat, 12 Dec 2020 19:46:16 -0700, Peter Flass wrote:
>>> 
>>>> https://apple.news/A_-wNCMkYTUqUYmLw17kK-A
>>> I have actually met David Barron on a number of occasions. I have
>>> had
>>> dinner with David Wheeler several times. When I went up to Martin
>>> Campbell-Kelly (who I had admired for years) at a meeting a couple of
>>> years ago, I was gobsmacked to find out that he already knew who *I* was!
>>> I have had a lot of contact with Martin Richards (I used to run a BCPL
>>> user group).
>>> And I met Ritchie and Thompson once, briefly.
>>> This is all quite worrying as some of them are now dead.
>>
>> I remember when Dennis Ritchie would post on the newsgroup comp.lang.c
>
>Sort of gives him an air of authority.

Technically 'gave' him.  http://www.legacy.com/ns/dennis-ritchie-obituary/154063273

I met him, Steven Johnson and a few others once at the USL Summit facility back in the
early 90's.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#215495

On 12/14/2020 2:00 PM, Dan Espen wrote:
> Dallas <dallas@texas.usa> writes:
> 
>> On 12/13/2020 8:49 AM, Bob Eager wrote:
>>> On Sat, 12 Dec 2020 19:46:16 -0700, Peter Flass wrote:
>>>
>>>> https://apple.news/A_-wNCMkYTUqUYmLw17kK-A
>>> I have actually met David Barron on a number of occasions. I have
>>> had
>>> dinner with David Wheeler several times. When I went up to Martin
>>> Campbell-Kelly (who I had admired for years) at a meeting a couple of
>>> years ago, I was gobsmacked to find out that he already knew who *I* was!
>>> I have had a lot of contact with Martin Richards (I used to run a BCPL
>>> user group).
>>> And I met Ritchie and Thompson once, briefly.
>>> This is all quite worrying as some of them are now dead.
>>
>> I remember when Dennis Ritchie would post on the newsgroup comp.lang.c
> 
> Sort of gives him an air of authority.
> He posted here many times.
> 

I took a multi-year hiatus from Usenet.
Went from needing serious consultation on C using comp.lang.c when I was a C programmer to looking 
at C as folklore after not using it (or Usenet) for a decade or so.

So I missed my chance to interact with Dennis here.

I would hate to live without a garbage collector these days.
But if I needed to do anything "real-time" ("ring zero" stuff) I think C is still a viable choice 
of language.
I liked the standardization documents and the language definition documents that accompanied C.

IIRC the world treated languages differently back then.   I don't have an exact description of how 
they were different, but it seemed things were more formally specified back then.   BNF diagrams 
and all.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#215496 — Re: origins of C

Dallas <dallas@texas.usa> wrote:
> On 12/14/2020 2:00 PM, Dan Espen wrote:
>> Dallas <dallas@texas.usa> writes:
>> 
>>> On 12/13/2020 8:49 AM, Bob Eager wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 12 Dec 2020 19:46:16 -0700, Peter Flass wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> https://apple.news/A_-wNCMkYTUqUYmLw17kK-A
>>>> I have actually met David Barron on a number of occasions. I have
>>>> had
>>>> dinner with David Wheeler several times. When I went up to Martin
>>>> Campbell-Kelly (who I had admired for years) at a meeting a couple of
>>>> years ago, I was gobsmacked to find out that he already knew who *I* was!
>>>> I have had a lot of contact with Martin Richards (I used to run a BCPL
>>>> user group).
>>>> And I met Ritchie and Thompson once, briefly.
>>>> This is all quite worrying as some of them are now dead.
>>> 
>>> I remember when Dennis Ritchie would post on the newsgroup comp.lang.c
>> 
>> Sort of gives him an air of authority.
>> He posted here many times.
>> 
> 
> I took a multi-year hiatus from Usenet.
> Went from needing serious consultation on C using comp.lang.c when I was
> a C programmer to looking 
> at C as folklore after not using it (or Usenet) for a decade or so.
> 
> So I missed my chance to interact with Dennis here.
> 
> I would hate to live without a garbage collector these days.
> But if I needed to do anything "real-time" ("ring zero" stuff) I think C
> is still a viable choice 
> of language.
> I liked the standardization documents and the language definition
> documents that accompanied C.
> 
> IIRC the world treated languages differently back then.   I don't have an
> exact description of how 
> they were different, but it seemed things were more formally specified
> back then.   BNF diagrams 
> and all.
> 
> 

The PL/I standard is extremely complete and detailed.

-- 
Pete

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#215502 — Re: origins of C

Peter Flass wrote:

> Dallas <dallas@texas.usa> wrote:
>> On 12/14/2020 2:00 PM, Dan Espen wrote:
>>> Dallas <dallas@texas.usa> writes:
>>> 


>> IIRC the world treated languages differently back then.   I don't have an
>> exact description of how
>> they were different, but it seemed things were more formally specified
>> back then.   BNF diagrams
>> and all.
>> 
>> 
> 
> The PL/I standard is extremely complete and detailed.
> 
I have seen the bnf for Pascal, it was not too huge, but certainly spanned a 
bunch of pages.

Jon

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#215507 — Re: origins of C

Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> wrote:
> Peter Flass wrote:
> 
>> Dallas <dallas@texas.usa> wrote:
>>> On 12/14/2020 2:00 PM, Dan Espen wrote:
>>>> Dallas <dallas@texas.usa> writes:
>>>> 
> 
> 
>>> IIRC the world treated languages differently back then.   I don't have an
>>> exact description of how
>>> they were different, but it seemed things were more formally specified
>>> back then.   BNF diagrams
>>> and all.
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> The PL/I standard is extremely complete and detailed.
>> 
> I have seen the bnf for Pascal, it was not too huge, but certainly spanned a 
> bunch of pages.

Possibly now languages of the week come and go so fast it’s not worth
writing a detailed spec.

-- 
Pete

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#215510 — Re: origins of C

Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> schrieb:
> Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> wrote:
>> Peter Flass wrote:
>> 
>>> Dallas <dallas@texas.usa> wrote:
>>>> On 12/14/2020 2:00 PM, Dan Espen wrote:
>>>>> Dallas <dallas@texas.usa> writes:
>>>>> 
>> 
>> 
>>>> IIRC the world treated languages differently back then.   I don't have an
>>>> exact description of how
>>>> they were different, but it seemed things were more formally specified
>>>> back then.   BNF diagrams
>>>> and all.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> The PL/I standard is extremely complete and detailed.
>>> 
>> I have seen the bnf for Pascal, it was not too huge, but certainly spanned a 
>> bunch of pages.
>
> Possibly now languages of the week come and go so fast it’s not worth
> writing a detailed spec.

A random C++ draft standard from 2018 I just grabbed has 1572 pages.
I guess that counts as "far too detailed" (but then again, C++ has
become completely insane).

Fortran is not a small language at all, but the 2018 standard has 630
pages, which is already large.

It's interesting to read what Kernighan has to say about C++ -
he's a very polite guy, but he writes in his memoir that he is
"barely literate in [C++]".  Small wonder.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#215513 — Re: origins of C

Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> writes:
>Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> schrieb:
>> Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> wrote:
>>> Peter Flass wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Dallas <dallas@texas.usa> wrote:
>>>>> On 12/14/2020 2:00 PM, Dan Espen wrote:
>>>>>> Dallas <dallas@texas.usa> writes:
>>>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>>> IIRC the world treated languages differently back then.   I don't have an
>>>>> exact description of how
>>>>> they were different, but it seemed things were more formally specified
>>>>> back then.   BNF diagrams
>>>>> and all.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> The PL/I standard is extremely complete and detailed.
>>>> 
>>> I have seen the bnf for Pascal, it was not too huge, but certainly spanned a 
>>> bunch of pages.
>>
>> Possibly now languages of the week come and go so fast it’s not worth
>> writing a detailed spec.
>
>A random C++ draft standard from 2018 I just grabbed has 1572 pages.
>I guess that counts as "far too detailed" (but then again, C++ has
>become completely insane).

The ARM (Acorn Risc Machine) processor documentation for the 8th
generation processors (ARMv8.6) runs to 8248 pages.  The Interrupt
controller, I/O Memory management unit and external debug unit
documentation adds an additional 2000+ pages.

There ain't nothing simple any more.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#215519 — Re: origins of C

On 2020-12-16, Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> wrote:
>
> It's interesting to read what Kernighan has to say about C++ -
> he's a very polite guy, but he writes in his memoir that he is
> "barely literate in [C++]".  Small wonder.

He also defends at least early C++, saying that Stroustrup had good
reasons for the choices he made. He doesn't say anything like that about
what's happened since, though...

Niklas
-- 
Just because you *can* write a Java Virtual Machine in INTERCAL, that
doesn't mean you *should*.
 -- David Cameron Staples makes the Understatement of the Year in asr

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#215564 — Re: origins of C

On Wed, 2020-12-16, Peter Flass wrote:
> Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> wrote:
>> Peter Flass wrote:
>> 
>>> Dallas <dallas@texas.usa> wrote:
>>>> On 12/14/2020 2:00 PM, Dan Espen wrote:
>>>>> Dallas <dallas@texas.usa> writes:
>>>>> 
>> 
>> 
>>>> IIRC the world treated languages differently back then.   I don't have an
>>>> exact description of how
>>>> they were different, but it seemed things were more formally specified
>>>> back then.   BNF diagrams
>>>> and all.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> The PL/I standard is extremely complete and detailed.
>>> 
>> I have seen the bnf for Pascal, it was not too huge, but certainly spanned a 
>> bunch of pages.
>
> Possibly now languages of the week come and go so fast it’s not worth
> writing a detailed spec.

I've assumed it's the difference between these standpoints:

A "I invented this language, but I can't be bothered writing compilers
   for every crazy architecture people come up with nowadays.  I want
   people to use it for a long time.  I don't want it to end up like
   Pascal ... so here's a spec you can follow to make a compiler, and
   a spec you can read if you want to use the language or verify that
   your program is correct."

B "I invented this language, and here's a compiler.  It's open source,
   so you can port it to crazy architectures if you want ... or you
   can send patches and see if I accept them.  As for correctness, if
   your program seems to do useful stuff, isn't that good enough?  Try
   not to be so negative!

   Also, be prepared to fix your program when I change what the
   compiler does, which I may do now and them.  Software has a
   best-before date, you know."

(Replace "compiler" with "interpreter" for most newer languages.)

/Jorgen

-- 
  // Jorgen Grahn <grahn@  Oo  o.   .     .
\X/     snipabacken.se>   O  o   .

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#215514 — Re: standard mania, was origins of C

In article <584763190.629680980.014917.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>,
Peter Flass  <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>The PL/I standard is extremely complete and detailed.

It was 400 pages, largely in impenetrable Vienna Definition Language.
The language in the standard was considerably smaller than the IBM
dialect that most people used (still use, I suppose.)

Fortran 77 was about the same size, although it was really only half
that length because each pair of pages had the spec for the full
language on one side and the subset on the other.

The C and Fortran standards have each grown quite a lot, in libraries
and interfaces more than the base languages.

-- 
Regards,
John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#215563

On Mon, 2020-12-14, Dallas wrote:
...
> I took a multi-year hiatus from Usenet.  Went from needing serious
> consultation on C using comp.lang.c when I was a C programmer to
> looking at C as folklore after not using it (or Usenet) for a decade
> or so.
>
> So I missed my chance to interact with Dennis here.
>
> I would hate to live without a garbage collector these days.

You probably mean "I would hate to live with C's memory management".
Neither C++ nor Python (to name two popular languages) rely on a
garbage collector, but you still don't have to manage memory manually.

(I am a big fan of the C++ way of doing it, since from my point of
view, it stays in the C tradition, which I like.)

> But if I needed to do anything "real-time" ("ring zero" stuff) I
> think C is still a viable choice of language.
...

/Jorgen

-- 
  // Jorgen Grahn <grahn@  Oo  o.   .     .
\X/     snipabacken.se>   O  o   .

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#215565

On 19 Dec 2020 18:26:08 GMT
Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> wrote:

> You probably mean "I would hate to live with C's memory management".
> Neither C++ nor Python (to name two popular languages) rely on a
> garbage collector, but you still don't have to manage memory manually.

	Python does https://stackify.com/python-garbage-collection/, C++
doesn't have one built in but there are any number of ones you can use.

-- 
Steve O'Hara-Smith                          |   Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN                                     | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins.                |    licences available see
You lose and Bill collects.                 |    http://www.sohara.org/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#215566

On 19 Dec 2020 18:26:08 GMT, Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se>
wrote:

>On Mon, 2020-12-14, Dallas wrote:
>...
>> I took a multi-year hiatus from Usenet.  Went from needing serious
>> consultation on C using comp.lang.c when I was a C programmer to
>> looking at C as folklore after not using it (or Usenet) for a decade
>> or so.
>>
>> So I missed my chance to interact with Dennis here.
>>
>> I would hate to live without a garbage collector these days.
>
>You probably mean "I would hate to live with C's memory management".
>Neither C++ nor Python (to name two popular languages) rely on a
>garbage collector, but you still don't have to manage memory manually.

What leads you to believe that Python does not use a garbage
collector?
>
>(I am a big fan of the C++ way of doing it, since from my point of
>view, it stays in the C tradition, which I like.)
>
>> But if I needed to do anything "real-time" ("ring zero" stuff) I
>> think C is still a viable choice of language.
>...
>
>/Jorgen

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#215577

On Sat, 2020-12-19, J  Clarke wrote:
> On 19 Dec 2020 18:26:08 GMT, Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se>
> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 2020-12-14, Dallas wrote:
>>...
>>> I took a multi-year hiatus from Usenet.  Went from needing serious
>>> consultation on C using comp.lang.c when I was a C programmer to
>>> looking at C as folklore after not using it (or Usenet) for a decade
>>> or so.
>>>
>>> So I missed my chance to interact with Dennis here.
>>>
>>> I would hate to live without a garbage collector these days.
>>
>>You probably mean "I would hate to live with C's memory management".
>>Neither C++ nor Python (to name two popular languages) rely on a
>>garbage collector, but you still don't have to manage memory manually.
>
> What leads you to believe that Python does not use a garbage
> collector?

I know it uses reference counting, and I was under the impression that
wasn't classified as a "garbage collector".

The Wikipedia page
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garbage_collection_(computer_science)>
says it does ... but then goes on to use my definition when it lists
the old Boehm garbage collector for C and C++, but not the widely
used shared_ptrs, which rely on reference counting.  So it's still not
clear to me which definition is correct.

On the other hand, my idea "reference counting is not true garbage
collection" may simply come from the hype around Java in the 1990s.
People were eager to claim that things that already existed in other
languages, weren't good enough.

/Jorgen

-- 
  // Jorgen Grahn <grahn@  Oo  o.   .     .
\X/     snipabacken.se>   O  o   .

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#215578

On 20 Dec 2020 16:14:11 GMT, Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se>
wrote:

>On Sat, 2020-12-19, J  Clarke wrote:
>> On 19 Dec 2020 18:26:08 GMT, Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 2020-12-14, Dallas wrote:
>>>...
>>>> I took a multi-year hiatus from Usenet.  Went from needing serious
>>>> consultation on C using comp.lang.c when I was a C programmer to
>>>> looking at C as folklore after not using it (or Usenet) for a decade
>>>> or so.
>>>>
>>>> So I missed my chance to interact with Dennis here.
>>>>
>>>> I would hate to live without a garbage collector these days.
>>>
>>>You probably mean "I would hate to live with C's memory management".
>>>Neither C++ nor Python (to name two popular languages) rely on a
>>>garbage collector, but you still don't have to manage memory manually.
>>
>> What leads you to believe that Python does not use a garbage
>> collector?
>
>I know it uses reference counting, and I was under the impression that
>wasn't classified as a "garbage collector".
>
>The Wikipedia page
><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garbage_collection_(computer_science)>
>says it does ... but then goes on to use my definition when it lists
>the old Boehm garbage collector for C and C++, but not the widely
>used shared_ptrs, which rely on reference counting.  So it's still not
>clear to me which definition is correct.
>
>On the other hand, my idea "reference counting is not true garbage
>collection" may simply come from the hype around Java in the 1990s.
>People were eager to claim that things that already existed in other
>languages, weren't good enough.

Reference counting is not the only garbage collector in Python though.
There is also a generational garbage collector.  While that is usually
transparent to the programmer there is a module that allows it to be
managed if one has a situation in which making adjustments would be
beneficial.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers

csiph-web