Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rochester!ritcv!cci632!rb From: rb@cci632.UUCP (Rex Ballard) Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc Subject: Re: C ?= Assembly Message-ID: <784@cci632.UUCP> Date: Fri, 19-Dec-86 17:44:19 EST Article-I.D.: cci632.784 Posted: Fri Dec 19 17:44:19 1986 Date-Received: Sat, 20-Dec-86 06:09:06 EST References: <385@unc.unc.UUCP| <981@zeus.UUCP> Reply-To: rb@ccird2.UUCP (Rex B) Organization: CCI, Communications Systems Division, Rochester, NY Lines: 25 |(Dan Tilque) writes: :-(Tim Rentsch) writes: :-In this regard I should point out that C is only barely a HLL, and :-should be nominated to replace FORTRAN as the world's most popular :-assembly language. |In another forum (comp.lang.c) C has been declared as the language in which |it is easiest to write portable code. Does this make it the closest |thing to the Universal Assembly Language mentioned in the original |posting? According to a few of the "folk lore" stories, C was actually intended to be a "universal assembler" rather than an HLL. This is one of the reasons why "Lint" was not included in the compiler in such a way as to make unlinted code bomb. The nice flexible syntax, combined with lack of strict typing, made it a good "generic assembler" for porting UNIX among other things. Remember, much of the "automatic typing" of B and BCPL were taken out of C. About the only thing they forgot was "absolute addressing" and "pathalogical calls" :-). Rex B.