From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Apr 17 03:06:41 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A539316A401 for ; Mon, 17 Apr 2006 03:06:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from oceanare@pacific.net.sg) Received: from smtpgate2.pacific.net.sg (smtpgate2.pacific.net.sg [203.120.90.32]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B2C8E43D46 for ; Mon, 17 Apr 2006 03:06:40 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from oceanare@pacific.net.sg) Received: (qmail 1045 invoked from network); 17 Apr 2006 03:06:37 -0000 Received: from maxwell2.pacific.net.sg (203.120.90.192) by smtpgate2.pacific.net.sg with SMTP; 17 Apr 2006 03:06:37 -0000 Received: from [192.168.0.107] ([210.24.122.33]) by maxwell2.pacific.net.sg with ESMTP id <20060417030636.BGIU28656.maxwell2.pacific.net.sg@[192.168.0.107]>; Mon, 17 Apr 2006 11:06:36 +0800 Message-ID: <44430610.6010704@pacific.net.sg> Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 11:05:52 +0800 From: Erich Dollansky Organization: oceanare pte ltd User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20060112) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?= References: <200604151313.32519.benlutz@datacomm.ch> <4441199C.4090802@carebears.mine.nu> <44415038.4020101@jamesbailie.com> <8664l991pf.fsf@xps.des.no> In-Reply-To: <8664l991pf.fsf@xps.des.no> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: James Bailie , freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why is not more FreeBSD software written in C++? X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 03:06:41 -0000 Hi, Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav wrote: > James Bailie writes: >> Efficiency is of prime importance in systems programming. The >> only language in which one can write more efficient programs than >> in C, is assembler, but it's not portable. >=20 > This is a myth. I'm surprised to see it a Lisp programmer perpetuate it is a myth that assembler is not portable? Erich