[Info-vax] Viable versus ideal programming languages

[Bill Gunshannon]

On 3/21/22 14:46, Simon Clubley wrote:
> On 2022-03-19, abrsvc <dansabrservices at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> I have used some of the mentioned languages for some projects with success.  I suppose that the point I am making too is that the correct languages should also fit the problem.  Using JAVA for example to solve numerical problems makes no sense.  FORTRAN is ideal for such things. (I know, Simon will say that C is too...).  Just because a language is new and is all the rage, does not mean that it is the right choice.
> 
> Actually Dan, no, I most certainly would _not_ say that.
> 
> I would say that C is a _viable_ programming language in that case,
> but I would not say that it is an _ideal_ programming language.
> 
> You may end up using something that is viable but is not your preferred
> language. This could be due to language availability across multiple
> environments, the ability of the language to be easily called from
> other languages, etc.
> 
> This is especially important when you are writing library code for
> example. Consider that I can write a portable library in C, and I can
> then compile it unchanged on VMS, Linux/FreeBSD/Unix, Windows, embedded
> operating systems, bare metal ARM/MIPS/etc, and even 8/16-bit MCUs if
> the library is small enough.
> 
> I can then easily call that C library from a wide range of languages
> running on those multiple operating systems and environments. The language
> also allows me to create code that runs both in kernel mode and user mode.
> 
> Name one other programming language that allows me to do all that.

What does any of that have to do with the language?  The specific
compiler maybe, but not necessarily the language.  I could see
not doing it in COBOL and probably LISP but otherwise, most languages
can do what you want.

Many programs, right down to the OS itself, on Primos were written
in a  number of languages all linked together successfully.

Library-wise, The NAG Mathematical Library was written in Fortran
and I saw it linked to a number of other languages.  The low level
languages offered on Primos could link to any other language they
offered (and there were a bunch!)  I used the same library to do
an Editor in Fortran, a DNS clone for the Sytek Broadband Network
in Pascal.  I saw it used in COBOL to provide Curses-like functions
before they became part of the standard.  And even C for some
low level Primos stuff (And Prime had the weirdest C compiler
you are ever likely to see).  Languages have little to do with
stuff like this,  It is more the mindset of the developer.

> 
> So, yes, I do think C is the most viable language in a wide range of areas,
> (and it's way better than Macro-32/Bliss), but I do not consider it to be
> the _ideal_ language in those areas. I believe I have expressed my
> language preferences enough times in this area. :-)
> 
> (And I still think it's a pity that Pillar never got established as
> an alternative to C).

Maybe we need to bring back MP/M....  Simple enough that it could
be done on every machine I can think of.  Powerful enough to do
the tasks you are talking about.  Low-level enough to even do the
hardware stuff usually relegated to C.  :-)

bill