Re: C, Pascal vs. linkers, was The History of the ALGOL Effort

"Peter \"Firefly\" Lund" <firefly@diku.dk>
16 Sep 2006 15:56:02 -0400

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
The History of the ALGOL Effort H.T.de.Beer@gmail.com (HT de Beer) (2006-08-14)
Re: The History of the ALGOL Effort gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2006-08-15)
Re: The History of the ALGOL Effort Juergen.Kahrs@vr-web.de (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=FCrgen_Kahrs?=) (2006-08-18)
Re: The History of the ALGOL Effort p_ludemann@yahoo.com (Peter Ludemann) (2006-08-29)
Re: The History of the ALGOL Effort henry@spsystems.net (2006-09-11)
Re: Pascal vs. linkers, was The History of the ALGOL Effort Juergen.Kahrs@vr-web.de (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=FCrgen_Kahrs?=) (2006-09-11)
Re: C, Pascal vs. linkers, was The History of the ALGOL Effort firefly@diku.dk (Peter \Firefly\Lund) (2006-09-16)
| List of all articles for this month |

From: "Peter \"Firefly\" Lund" <firefly@diku.dk>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 16 Sep 2006 15:56:02 -0400
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Copenhagen
References: 06-08-082 06-08-086 06-08-105 06-08-138 06-09-050 06-09-052
Keywords: C, history

On Tue, 11 Sep 2006, [ISO-8859-1] Jürgen Kahrs wrote:


> 1990 that I felt C had won. The one single reason that I saw (at that
> time) was Microsoft choosing C and not Pascal as the language they
> used to re-write MS-DOS 3.x (which was implemented in 8086 assembler
> until then).


I thought it was _IBM's_ decision to rewrite DOS in C. The result was
PC-DOS 4.0 with a few new features (and lots of bloat), which Microsoft
had to scramble to copy.


-Peter



Post a followup to this message

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