Nonsense in BYTE reader columns

[Brent Chapman]

In article <8606141823.AA12695 at pavepaws> dillon at PAVEPAWS.BERKELEY.EDU (Matt Dillon) writes:
>
>	Get a Load of this, everyone (May 1986 Byte)
 	[lines concerning misinformed Atari fanatic deleted]
>	The other thing in the BYTE issue that really made me puke was their
>article "Easy C".  The author attempts to convince the reader that C would
>be much better if you didn't use it's constructs .. replacing them with
>#define equivalants which make C look like Pascal.  Next, he'll be telling
>us not to use pointers.  Give me a break!
>
>					-Matt

If I remember correctly, the basic ideas of the article were:
	1)  We have a group of programmers who don't know C.  (gasp!!! :-)
	2)  We have a program that (for SOME reason; I don't remember
	    what it was) MUST be written in C.
	3)  We don't have time for them to become proficient in C.  (Let's
	    be honest folks:  C is NOT the easiest language in the world
	    when you're first learning it.)
	4)  This is what we did to ease the transition.

I felt that the article was a fine testimony to the flexibility of C.  The
point wasn't that you SHOULD do things this way, but that you COULD.  And
there's nothing wrong with someone programming that way, if it increases
their efficiency and doesn't hinder the quality of the code.  If you prefer
"real" C, just run the other person's program through a selective pre-
processor.  That's one of the really wonderful things about C: the
preprocessor.  Why not use it?


Brent

--

Brent Chapman
chapman at pavepaws.berkeley.edu
ucbvax!pavepaws!chapman

TANSTAAFL!  (There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch!)