Re: Have we reached the asymptotic plateau of innovation in programming la

SLK Systems <slkpg3@gmail.com> wrote:
> By "significant developments" and "standardizing" I meant that for
> programmers to have settled on 1 hardware/OS architecture and 1
> programming language is something new, and good. [[...]]


I see no sign that programmers have settled on 1 programming language.
Fortran, C, and C++ are certainly in widespread use, but then again,
so are SQL, Lisp, Perl, Mathematica, Matlab, and TCL (to name only a
few others that *don't* have syntax-and-semantics-similar-to-C).




> Point is that Wintel
> overwhelmed all other architectures, [[...]]


I see no sign that Wintel has overwhelemed all other architectures.
It's widely used for desktops, but outside of that space it's rare.
E.g., what fraction of cellphones use it? What fraction of the TOP500
list of supercomputers? What fraction of the code in a modern
fly-by-wire airliner is running on a Wintel architecture? As a final
example, a few years ago I read that the world's #1 most common
computer peripheral device was a fuel-injected carburetor; I rather
doubt it runs on either the software or the hardware part of "Wintel".


--
-- "Jonathan Thornburg [remove -animal to reply]" <jthorn@astro.indiana-zebra.edu>
      Dept of Astronomy, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, USA
      "C++ is to programming as sex is to reproduction. Better ways might
        technically exist but they're not nearly as much fun." -- Nikolai Irgens

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