[TUHS] Comments on "C"
ron at ronnatalie.com
Fri Sep 9 05:20:31 AEST 2016
Efficiency isn't always the issue. Even with the single layer break (and
certainly with the local goto) you can break structure.
The language, in my opinion, doesn't need further ways to break structure.
I'd have settled for a more robust preprocessor language, but such is life
with what was a ground breaking language back in the 70's.
Most of my complaints about C are because it's "standard" library was awful
back in the seventies and it really didn't improve much over the years.
From: TUHS [mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On Behalf Of Tony Finch
Sent: Thursday, September 8, 2016 10:23 AM
To: Noel Chiappa
Cc: tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org
Subject: Re: [TUHS] Comments on "C"
Noel Chiappa <jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu> wrote:
> > 1. Computed goto
> Can't you make a switch statement do what you need there?
Interesting comments on how effectively CPUs and compilers handle inner
loops of interpreters:
Lots more research on interpreter efficiency:
f.anthony.n.finch <dot at dotat.at> http://dotat.at/ - I xn--zr8h punycode
German Bight, Humber, Thames: Southwest 4 or 5, increasing 6 at times.
Smooth or slight, occasionally moderate. Mainly fair. Good, occasionally
More information about the TUHS