[Ilugc] .a-tip-a-day (patch - apply diffs and act as inverse of diff)
- From: steve@xxxxxxxxxxxx (steve)
- Date: Wed Sep 30 15:53:31 2009
On 09/30/2009 03:41 PM, Manvendra Bhangui wrote:
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 3:19 PM, steve<steve@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
-- I won't ever defend my preference of language /solely/ by citing the
number of syscalls that a final executable needs at runtime.
It's a free country and that's your choice. It never will be mine. As long
as I can write something faster and better in a language I know and I love,
then why not?
There you go, you've done it again. You've taken my statement and twisted it
around as though I was dictating you to accept my language preference.
All I was saying that your argument was ridiculous. Allow me to explain. Read
it
slowly this time ...maybe a couple of times:
You said:
the C programs does the same job with 23 system calls
the perl program takes 160 system calls to just print the line "hello world"
on screen
The intent of reply was to point out that ...
the C programs does the same job with 23 system calls
*plus* the number of syscalls it would take for gcc to convert text to
executable
code, which is what perl does on your behalf. So, comparing number of syscalls
of the
final executable is not a valid measure of appropriateness of a langauage.
did that make any sense to you ? If it didn't I am sorry, I can't be more
clearer than that.
cheers,
- steve
--
random non tech spiel:
http://lonetwin.blogspot.com/
tech randomness:
http://lonehacks.blogspot.com/
what i'm stumbling into:
http://lonetwin.stumbleupon.com/
Other related posts:
