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

Groups > comp.lang.c > #100530

Re: Pine 64

From BartC <bc@freeuk.com>
Newsgroups comp.lang.c
Subject Re: Pine 64
Date 2016-12-28 22:23 +0000
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <o41dut$h8b$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References <o3uqp5$2bo$1@dont-email.me> <d2f3ad19-0111-4062-8d14-77dd4fcf17c4@googlegroups.com> <o4190s$uhv$1@dont-email.me> <3685c981-98dc-413b-9efb-c3ecebc1bbf8@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On 28/12/2016 22:12, Malcolm McLean wrote:
> On Wednesday, December 28, 2016 at 8:59:42 PM UTC, David Brown wrote:
>> On 28/12/16 19:10, Malcolm McLean wrote:

>> No, it is not.  I am not sure what you think the market for B64 is, if
>> even /you/ think there would be use for it anywhere.  But these sorts of
>> boards are programmed in C, or using high level languages such as
>> Python, Ruby, etc., depending on the type of application.
>>
> Virtually all the boards run embedded Linux, so you can say there is
> no room for a competitor there - Linux is the established standard,
> it does the job, you'd have to come up with something radically
> better to compete.

But Linux == C for most practical purposes.

> But we've got the opposite situation with languages. A long list.
> Which means that its high time something like B64 came along and
> provided a scaleable, interface-friendly, standardised method
> of programming computers.

If you had to distribute a source code app to run on Linux, the best bet 
would be C or Python. C if it had to be low-level or fast.

B64 is more of a problem since it's unlikely any random Linux system 
will have a compiler for it already installed.

But all the tools people have will be geared up for the mainstream 
languages (syntax-highlighting for one).

Introducing a new language has a lot of problems, even apart from 
persuading people to use it.

-- 
Bartc

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

Thread

Pine 64 jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-12-27 23:44 +0100
  Re: Pine 64 raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2016-12-27 22:54 +0000
    Re: Pine 64 jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-12-28 00:41 +0100
      Re: Pine 64 raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2016-12-28 12:14 +0000
    Re: Pine 64 David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-12-28 13:39 +0100
      Re: Pine 64 raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2016-12-28 12:45 +0000
        Re: Pine 64 David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-12-28 14:02 +0100
          Re: Pine 64 Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-12-28 10:11 -0800
            Re: Pine 64 Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-12-28 10:50 -0800
            Re: Pine 64 jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-12-28 22:55 +0100
              Re: Pine 64 David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-12-29 12:21 +0100
                Re: Pine 64 jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-12-29 21:38 +0100
                Re: Pine 64 David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-12-30 10:10 +0100
            Re: Pine 64 David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-12-28 21:53 +0100
            Re: Pine 64 raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2016-12-28 19:54 +0000
  Re: Pine 64 Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2016-12-27 18:03 -0500
    Re: Pine 64 jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-12-28 00:36 +0100
      Re: Pine 64 Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2016-12-27 18:44 -0500
        Re: Pine 64 jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-12-28 00:54 +0100
  Re: Pine 64 Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-12-28 11:27 +0100
    Re: Pine 64 jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-12-28 12:10 +0100
      Re: Pine 64 Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-12-28 12:59 +0100
  Re: Pine 64 Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-12-28 10:10 -0800
    Re: Pine 64 supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-12-29 08:30 -0800
    Re: Pine 64 David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-12-29 13:22 +0100
      Re: Pine 64 Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-12-29 07:47 -0800
        Re: Pine 64 Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-12-29 17:03 +0000
      Re: Pine 64 Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-12-29 04:50 -0800
        Re: Pine 64 Reinhardt Behm <rbehm@hushmail.com> - 2016-12-29 21:25 +0800
      Re: Pine 64 Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-12-29 09:28 -0800
      Re: Pine 64 Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-12-29 14:22 +0000
    Re: Pine 64 David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-12-29 13:28 +0100
    Re: Pine 64 Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-12-28 14:12 -0800
      Re: Pine 64 BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-12-28 22:23 +0000
      Re: Pine 64 Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2016-12-29 18:43 +0000
    Re: Pine 64 David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-12-28 21:59 +0100
    Re: Pine 64 jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2016-12-28 23:43 +0100
    Re: Pine 64 jt@toerring.de (Jens Thoms Toerring) - 2016-12-28 22:56 +0000
      Re: Pine 64 Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-12-28 16:00 -0800
        Re: A programming language called 'B64' Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-12-30 16:08 +0100

csiph-web