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

Groups > comp.programming > #9774

Re: C is not a low level language

Path csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net>
Newsgroups comp.lang.c, comp.programming, alt.os.linux.ubuntu, comp.sys.raspberry-pi, alt.comp.os.windows-10, alt.windows7.general
Subject Re: C is not a low level language
Date Tue, 26 Feb 2019 09:59:23 +0000
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Lines 60
Message-ID <20190226095923.6beb4d32e4ceefea42600fdb@eircom.net> (permalink)
References <q4sc7g$bjg$1@dont-email.me> <q4t5ht$ol3$2@toylet.eternal-september.org> <q4t78c$ver$1@toylet.eternal-september.org> <q4t9bu$81p$1@dont-email.me> <q51htv$6s3$2@dont-email.me> <20190225225900.79d937de664735f8e4fd742b@eircom.net> <q52v2g$brv$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version 1.0
Content-Type text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding 8bit
Injection-Info reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="278ef6fc93fb5694ec5812204a239e99"; logging-data="32646"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX186alg+JNbqAPCfK9RuQHzXTDslwX9/4sI="
Cancel-Lock sha1:jFFAsrNCCd+Ay0Av546QmXIEAlQ=
X-Newsreader Sylpheed 3.7.0 (GTK+ 2.24.32; amd64-portbld-freebsd12.0)
X-Clacks-Overhead "GNU Terry Pratchett"
Xref csiph.com comp.lang.c:141411 comp.programming:9774 alt.os.linux.ubuntu:202773 comp.sys.raspberry-pi:19766 alt.comp.os.windows-10:86242

Cross-posted to 6 groups.

Show key headers only | View raw

On Tue, 26 Feb 2019 09:57:51 +0100
Björn Lundin <b.f.lundin@gmail.com> wrote:

> Den 2019-02-25 kl. 23:59, skrev Ahem A Rivet's Shot:
> > On Mon, 25 Feb 2019 21:07:27 +0100
> > Björn Lundin <b.f.lundin@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> Yeah! And if we remove the seat belts, air bags, and deformation zones
> >> from cars, we would soon only have the 'real' drivers left
> >> Let's call it the 'c' car.
> > 
> > 	Actually they're called motorbikes and a lot of people drive
> > them.
> > 
> 
> Yes and they think they are immortal, or at least very good at riding
> them.

	Yep the comparison with C programmers is pretty exact :) or should
that be :(

> However according to
> https://www.iii.org/fact-statistic/facts-statistics-motorcycle-crashes
> 
> "In 2016, motorcyclists were 28 times more likely than passenger car 
> occupants to die in a crash per vehicle mile traveled."

	C programmers are probably 28 times more likely than OO programmers
to create security holes/potential crashes.

> Yes, a _VERY_ skilled c-programmer thinks that his code is the best.
> It may be. But there are far more programmers that THINK they are very 
> skilled c programmers. And they fuck up.

	Just as there are some motorcyclists who are remarkably safe, they
usually have *much* faster reflexes than average and extremely good
concentration. Yamaha produced a very light 350cc bike called the YPVS
which many bikers concluded stood for Young Person's Vehicular Suicide -
the thing was a street legal racing bike

> All buffer overruns can be blamed on the c-language.

	Nah, I'm sure many have been perpetrated in assembler - probably
some by me!

> And the language can either help them to produce better code,
> or it can hinder them. C hinders, Ada helps.

	Ada as a car, C as a motorbike[1] - the former will get you through
London traffic in comfort and safety, the latter will get you there more
quickly with much greater risk. Both have their place but most people
should use a car.

[1] Hmm Java as the tube - safe, reliable, slow and uncomfortable.

-- 
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/

Back to comp.programming | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: C is not a low level language "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 12:40 +0800
  Re: C is not a low level language The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 05:16 +0000
    Re: C is not a low level language "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 13:20 +0800
      Re: C is not a low level language "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 13:24 +0800
      Re: C is not a low level language "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 19:45 +0800
      Re: C is not a low level language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2019-02-24 13:09 +0000
        Re: C is not a low level language The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 14:38 +0000
          Re: C is not a low level language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2019-02-24 15:18 +0000
            Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-24 17:21 +0100
              Re: C is not a low level language The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 17:43 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-24 20:17 +0100
              Re: C is not a low level language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2019-02-24 18:19 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-24 20:02 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2019-02-24 19:26 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-24 21:36 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2019-02-24 20:47 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 21:10 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-25 08:25 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2019-02-25 12:24 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-25 17:04 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2019-02-25 16:52 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-24 17:59 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2019-02-25 08:46 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-25 09:36 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2019-02-25 10:13 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-26 09:56 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-25 14:12 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-25 12:20 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-25 13:36 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-25 10:29 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-25 09:41 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-25 10:55 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-25 10:24 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 21:03 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-25 08:58 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2019-02-25 09:40 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-25 10:01 +0100
              Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-24 12:55 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-25 08:31 +0100
            Re: C is not a low level language The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 17:42 +0000
              Re: C is not a low level language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2019-02-24 18:19 +0000
            Re: C is not a low level language Bill Findlay <findlaybill@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2019-02-24 17:56 +0000
              Re: C is not a low level language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2019-02-24 18:23 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 20:58 +0000
              Re: C is not a low level language The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 20:52 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Bill Findlay <findlaybill@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2019-02-25 16:31 +0000
              Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-25 14:01 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2019-02-25 23:04 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-25 15:53 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language Bill Findlay <findlaybill@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2019-02-28 16:07 +0000
              Re: C is not a low level language Björn Lundin <b.f.lundin@gmail.com> - 2019-02-25 20:50 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Bill Findlay <findlaybill@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2019-02-28 16:04 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2019-02-28 16:25 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2019-02-28 11:56 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language "NY" <me@privacy.net> - 2019-02-28 19:45 +0000
              Re: C is not a low level language Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-25 17:55 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Bill Findlay <findlaybill@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2019-02-28 16:03 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-28 11:25 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-28 19:30 +0000
          Re: C is not a low level language Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2019-02-24 20:47 +0000
            Re: C is not a low level language The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 21:29 +0000
              Re: C is not a low level language Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2019-02-25 20:16 +0000
      Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-24 12:53 -0800
      Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-25 09:49 +0200
    Re: C is not a low level language Björn Lundin <b.f.lundin@gmail.com> - 2019-02-25 21:07 +0100
      Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-25 22:59 +0000
        Re: C is not a low level language Björn Lundin <b.f.lundin@gmail.com> - 2019-02-26 09:57 +0100
          Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-26 09:59 +0000
  Re: C is not a low level language Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> - 2019-02-24 19:54 +1300
    Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-24 07:56 +0000
      Re: C is not a low level language Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> - 2019-02-24 21:58 +1300
        Re: C is not a low level language "A. Dumas" <alexandre@dumas.fr.invalid> - 2019-02-24 10:57 +0100
        Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-24 10:13 +0000
        Re: C is not a low level language The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 10:47 +0000
          Re: C is not a low level language "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2019-02-24 08:48 -0500
            Re: C is not a low level language The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 14:42 +0000
            Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-25 07:15 +0000
              Re: C is not a low level language "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2019-02-25 09:25 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-25 15:03 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2019-02-25 12:10 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-25 17:58 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Axel Berger <Spam@Berger-Odenthal.De> - 2019-02-25 17:44 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-25 19:18 +0200
            Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-25 10:35 +0200
              Re: C is not a low level language "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2019-02-25 10:44 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2019-02-25 12:29 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-25 14:26 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "NY" <me@privacy.net> - 2019-02-25 17:08 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-25 20:08 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-25 18:00 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-27 22:37 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-28 02:25 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language Diesel <nobody@haph.org> - 2019-03-05 04:29 +0000
              Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-25 12:27 +0000
              Re: C is not a low level language "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2019-02-25 09:36 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-25 15:05 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-25 19:20 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-25 23:02 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-26 06:52 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-26 12:41 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-26 12:20 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-26 14:01 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2019-02-26 08:48 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Björn Lundin <b.f.lundin@gmail.com> - 2019-02-26 19:20 +0100
              Re: C is not a low level language Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2019-02-25 10:04 -0500
        Re: C is not a low level language lonelydad <lonelydad58@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 14:44 +0000
        Re: C is not a low level language "U-laptop\\Norah" <Norah@laptop.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> - 2019-02-27 16:16 -0600
          Re: C is not a low level language Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> - 2019-03-01 12:12 +1300
            Re: C is not a low level language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2019-03-01 00:19 +0000
      Re: C is not a low level language Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2019-02-24 19:59 -0800
        Re: C is not a low level language Bill Findlay <findlaybill@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2019-02-25 16:10 +0000
        Re: C is not a low level language Björn Lundin <b.f.lundin@gmail.com> - 2019-02-25 21:02 +0100
          Re: C is not a low level language Lars Enderin <lars.enderin@telia.com> - 2019-02-26 00:37 +0100
            Re: C is not a low level language Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2019-02-25 19:09 -0500
            Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-26 06:52 +0000
    Re: C is not a low level language T <T@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 00:30 -0800
      Re: C is not a low level language T <T@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 00:31 -0800
      Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-24 10:16 +0000
    Re: C is not a low level language "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2019-02-24 11:22 +0000
      Re: C is not a low level language "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2019-02-24 08:51 -0500
        Re: C is not a low level language pyotr filipivich <phamp@mindspring.com> - 2019-02-24 07:20 -0800
          Re: C is not a low level language "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2019-02-24 15:35 +0000
            Re: C is not a low level language "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2019-02-24 11:05 -0500
            Re: C is not a low level language pyotr filipivich <phamp@mindspring.com> - 2019-02-24 14:39 -0800
              Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-24 19:11 -0800
              Re: C is not a low level language Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2019-02-25 09:41 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2019-02-25 14:53 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2019-02-25 10:19 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-25 16:38 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2019-02-25 11:20 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2019-02-25 17:49 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-26 09:18 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-25 12:17 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-25 20:25 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-25 13:40 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-26 12:45 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-26 08:02 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2019-02-26 09:11 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Diesel <nobody@haph.org> - 2019-03-05 04:29 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-26 09:23 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-26 08:02 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-26 17:57 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language Diesel <nobody@haph.org> - 2019-03-05 04:29 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-25 17:42 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-25 22:33 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-26 09:30 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-25 12:17 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-25 13:52 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language "NY" <me@privacy.net> - 2019-02-25 15:20 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-25 12:17 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-25 18:47 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-25 13:50 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-25 18:59 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-25 20:15 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2019-02-25 18:38 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-26 12:49 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-25 13:40 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-26 12:55 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2019-02-26 16:29 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Diesel <nobody@haph.org> - 2019-03-05 04:29 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-03-04 23:43 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language "NY" <me@privacy.net> - 2019-02-25 18:16 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "NY" <me@privacy.net> - 2019-02-25 17:44 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-25 13:05 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2019-02-26 00:51 -0600
                Re: C is not a low level language "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2019-02-26 10:58 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2019-02-26 10:53 -0600
                Re: C is not a low level language Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-26 17:49 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2019-02-26 18:11 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-26 18:24 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2019-02-26 19:24 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2019-02-26 19:44 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language nobody@example.org (Scott) - 2019-02-26 06:33 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-25 12:17 -0500
        Re: C is not a low level language Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2019-02-24 20:03 -0800
      Re: C is not a low level language pyotr filipivich <phamp@mindspring.com> - 2019-02-24 14:56 -0800
  Re: C is not a low level language Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2019-02-24 20:43 +0000
    Re: C is not a low level language "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2019-02-25 14:14 +0800
      Re: C is not a low level language "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2019-02-25 10:45 +0000
        Re: C is not a low level language "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2019-02-25 19:04 +0800

csiph-web