4 ms·

None I can think of, but I've long since given up on absolute certainty.

• clouddrover 10y ago
  Then what are you in agreement with in Kernighan's assessment of Pascal? His assessment may have made sense 35 years ago but is out of date today.
  • qwertyuiop924 10y ago
    ...Which was the point I was trying to make. I am in agreement with Kernighan's assessment of the language he assessed. This is not the same language that Pascal is today. This was probably confusing. I am sorry.
  • pjmlp 10y ago
    Even 35 years ago it didn't make much sense, because he deliberately ignored the Pascal dialects that didn't had those set of issues. Also C outside UNIX was just a mix of K&R C dialects, each with its own set of quirks and as portable across compiler vendors, as those Pascal dialects.
    • qwertyuiop924 10y ago
      C inside of unix, which is probably the world Brian was coming from, didn't have those problems. And he had a point about the lack of unification. As to ignoring the dialects lacking that set of issues, I don't see how so. He explicitly stated that various dialects had solved the problems he discussed, but noted that such solutions were non-portable. So I still consider it a valid assessment of the language he assessed. But I also acknowledge that Pascal is no longer that language.