Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 6th Nov 2005 11:50 UTC
UNIX was a terrific workhorse for its time, but eventually the old nag needs to be put out to pasture. David Chisnall argues that it's time to retire UNIX in favor of modern systems with a lot more horsepower. "UNIX has a lot of strengths, but like any other design it's starting to show its age. Some of the points listed in this article apply less to some UNIX-like systems, some apply more."
Thread beginning with comment 57068
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:
Just as you know nothing about C and C++ otherwise you would not have grouped them the same as in "C/C++"
What? C and C++ are essentially different dialects of the same language. C++ inherits features from C, Algol, and Simula 67, but it was writen as a superset of C. In fact, I argue if Scheme and Dylan can be considered dialects of LISP, then C++, Java, and C# can be considered dialects of the C family (or even the Algol family, which is much (!) larger. I will make a note here that Java and C# are syntactically like C, but not much like C under the hood. C++, on the other hand, although less like C than in the early days, is still very much a C language.). I think the grandparent poster may have understood more than you believe.
What about LISP machines? What about House (http://www.cse.ogi.edu/~hallgren/House/)? What about SqueakNOS (http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/1762)? These are Operating Systems (in the general sence of the term) that are built upon languages that are definitely not in the C family. Maybe the point of the grandparent in grouping C and C++ together was to point out that creating an OS on C++ really isn't much different than creating an OS on C, as far as implementation language goes.