Hi Igor,
On 28 December 2010 16:13, Igor Stasenko siguctua@gmail.com wrote:
P.S. i think i know the answer to question why "computer revolution didn't happened yet", because every time people inventing something new, they implementing it in C.
... On the other hand, stacking ever more abstractions on top of each other eventually costs an amount of performance that will be noticed.
The key words here is 'on top of' which means an evolutionary approach, not revolutionary. Because for revolutionary things, you would use 'instead of' wording.
good distinction, I see.
Every time you building something on top of C, you inheriting its good and bad traits, because you can't escape the semantic model, imposed by C language and its compiler(s).
I've found C to be rather malleable; a possible way of providing one least complex abstraction over raw assembly. Not comfy, but malleable.
However, ultimately, you will have to talk to the metal. I completely agree that it is much nicer to talk to the metal from a language standing on a higher ground. The required compiler should not waste resources (of whatever kind). Building such a compiler surely is daunting. Perhaps that is one reason why the "C layer" is still popular as a target.
Or is it the metal that is shaped in the wrong way? There used to be Lisp machines ...
Best,
Michael