> Some people literally believe that C maps directly to the machine, when it does not. Maybe they did, 5 years (or more) ago when that essay came out. it was

> Some people literally believe that C maps directly to the machine, when it does not. Maybe they did, 5 years (or more) ago when that essay came out. it was wrong even then, but repeating it is even more wrong. > This is just a factual inaccuracy. No. It's what we call A Strawman Argument, because no one in this thread claimed that C was uniquely close to the hardware. Jumping in to destroy the argument when no one is making it is almost textbook example of strawmanning.