Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?"

"Marco van de Voort" <marcov@toad.stack.nl>
20 Nov 2002 15:18:02 -0500

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
[6 earlier articles]
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" Gayev.D.G.=?iso-8859-1?Q?=3Cdg=E0ev=40mail=2Eru=3E (2002-11-17)
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com (Robert A Duff) (2002-11-17)
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" jamesp_spam_me_not@silver-future.com (James Powell) (2002-11-17)
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" thp@cs.ucr.edu (2002-11-17)
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" mwotton@cse.unsw.edu.au (Mark Alexander Wolton) (2002-11-20)
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" thp@cs.ucr.edu (2002-11-20)
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" marcov@toad.stack.nl (Marco van de Voort) (2002-11-20)
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" n368714668.ch@chch.demon.co.uk (Charles Bryant) (2002-11-20)
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" peter_flass@yahoo.com (Peter Flass) (2002-11-20)
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" peter_flass@yahoo.com (Peter Flass) (2002-11-20)
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" er+cc@cs.brown.edu (Manos Renieris) (2002-11-20)
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" md9slj@mdstud.chalmers.se (Stefan Ljungstrand) (2002-11-20)
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" torbenm@diku.dk (Torben Ęgidius Mogensen) (2002-11-24)
[54 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |

From: "Marco van de Voort" <marcov@toad.stack.nl>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 20 Nov 2002 15:18:02 -0500
Organization: Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands
References: 02-11-059 02-11-071 02-11-083 02-11-097
Keywords: C, design
Posted-Date: 20 Nov 2002 15:18:02 EST

>> Gayev.D.G.=?koi8-r?Q?=3Cdg=C1ev=40mail=2Eru=3E?=@mail.rsl.ru wrote:
>> : WONG SAI-KEE wrote:
>>
>> : Most modern languages require variables (as well as other objects) to
>>
>> But, languages like HyperCard, VisualBasic (I was told) do not.


  Robert A Duff wrote:
> Languages should be designed primarily for the human reader.
> Declarations make programs easier to understand, presuming you are
> declaring useful information (useful to the human reader).


I personally think the reasons are compilation, and the error catching.


Note that adding optional typing to VB increases performance, and is
considered "professional".


Therefore, the compiled element of VB seems to favor typing too.


Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.