3 ms·

You reveal the primary flaw in your thinking with the phrase "C folk." Languages are not enemy camps. Just learn them both and use the appropriate tool in the

You reveal the primary flaw in your thinking with the phrase "C folk." Languages are not enemy camps. Just learn them both and use the appropriate tool in the appropriate situation - python for glue, prototyping, business systems, web programming, etc. C for operating systems, networking layers, database engines, etc. Try not to attach your ego to either one.

gnaritas 18y ago
You're hand waving, and there was no flaw in my thinking. C doesn't scare me and I use many languages, and that still has no bearing on the point of the conversation. C is a maintainability nightmare compared to lighter weight scripting languages. That fact stands on its own. There are "C folk" who won't use anything else because they're stuck in the rut of only thinking of execution speed, pointing that out is not a flaw, it's a fact.
- barryfandango 18y ago
  Ok, I will address your argument directly. You state that it's possible to write maintainable C in the best case, but that the worst-case is more revealing. However if we're to be fair, we must also look at the worst case for scripting languages. For example, which of these is more maintainable? http://www.p-nand-q.com/python/obfuscated_python.html http://www.p-nand-q.com/python/obfuscated_python.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Obfuscated_C_Code_Contest http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Obfuscated_C_Code... I would suggest that neither one is particularly maintainable, nor are either of these styles of code likely to appear in the real world. Therefore the worst case for these languages is not really more telling, and not applicable to this discussion.
  - gnaritas 18y ago
    I wasn't the one who claimed C's worse case was better than Python's best. Perhaps you should reread the thread and see what I was objecting to. You can write bad code in any language, but some don't let you blow your foot off as easily. It's well known and well accepted that higher level languages are more maintainable that C, that's just a fact. If you don't agree, then you're the one making radical claims, not I. Regardless, I'm bored now, this is a dead horse.

gnaritas 18y ago

You're hand waving, and there was no flaw in my thinking. C doesn't scare me and I use many languages, and that still has no bearing on the point of the conversation. C is a maintainability nightmare compared to lighter weight scripting languages. That fact stands on its own. There are "C folk" who won't use anything else because they're stuck in the rut of only thinking of execution speed, pointing that out is not a flaw, it's a fact.

barryfandango 18y ago
Ok, I will address your argument directly. You state that it's possible to write maintainable C in the best case, but that the worst-case is more revealing. However if we're to be fair, we must also look at the worst case for scripting languages. For example, which of these is more maintainable? http://www.p-nand-q.com/python/obfuscated_python.html http://www.p-nand-q.com/python/obfuscated_python.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Obfuscated_C_Code_Contest http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Obfuscated_C_Code... I would suggest that neither one is particularly maintainable, nor are either of these styles of code likely to appear in the real world. Therefore the worst case for these languages is not really more telling, and not applicable to this discussion.
- gnaritas 18y ago
  I wasn't the one who claimed C's worse case was better than Python's best. Perhaps you should reread the thread and see what I was objecting to. You can write bad code in any language, but some don't let you blow your foot off as easily. It's well known and well accepted that higher level languages are more maintainable that C, that's just a fact. If you don't agree, then you're the one making radical claims, not I. Regardless, I'm bored now, this is a dead horse.