Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 10:59:10 +0400 From: "Andrew Pantyukhin" <infofarmer@gmail.com> To: "Erich Dollansky" <oceanare@pacific.net.sg> Cc: James Bailie <jimmy@jamesbailie.com>, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?= <des@des.no>, freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why is not more FreeBSD software written in C++? Message-ID: <cb5206420604162359y6dff9867l5f7db72c754f71e3@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <44430610.6010704@pacific.net.sg> References: <200604151313.32519.benlutz@datacomm.ch> <4441199C.4090802@carebears.mine.nu> <44415038.4020101@jamesbailie.com> <8664l991pf.fsf@xps.des.no> <44430610.6010704@pacific.net.sg>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 4/17/06, Erich Dollansky <oceanare@pacific.net.sg> wrote: > Hi, > > Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav wrote: > > James Bailie <jimmy@jamesbailie.com> 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. > > > > This is a myth. I'm surprised to see it a Lisp programmer perpetuate > > it is a myth that assembler is not portable? No, obviously the other thing.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?cb5206420604162359y6dff9867l5f7db72c754f71e3>