Slashdot Mirror
Linux Journal Interview With Brian Kernighan
pndiku writes "Linux Journal has an interesting interview with Brian Kernighan where he talks about AWK, AMPL and how he had nothing to do with the creation of C."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
1: but the graphical interfaces are more responsive on Windows than through an X interface.
Isnt that what we've been saying all this time?
2: Yes, long ago. Multics was an acronym for something like Multiplexed Information and Computing Service, and it was big and complicated because it had many of everything.
Are there still any usable capibility systems out there? My friend found an old PrimeOS box with everything. Yet to get it running, as damn near every port is the same (spitz n sparken if you're wrong).
3: C is perhaps the best balance of expressiveness and efficiency that has ever been seen in programming languages.
If anything, LISP is better. If you want 3d virtual worlds which events trigger other events on a time scale, it's HELL to do in C. Lisp allows that kind of control, with the inclusion of CPU hits (in respect to C).
4: And modern systems are so messy and complicated that they are more frustrating than rewarding most of the time.
After reading that statement, Why'd they interview him? The whole idea of programming is to reduce or STOP that result. Programmers make it easier on users (well, supposed to)...
I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you Mac running Linux fanatics? I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of a Mac running Linux(a 8600/300 w/64 Megs of RAM) for about 20 minutes now while it attempts to copy a 17 Meg file from one folder on the hard drive to another folder. 20 minutes. At home, on my Pentium Pro 200 running NT 4, which by all standards should be a lot slower than this Mac, the same operation would take about 2 minutes. If that.
In addition, during this file transfer, Netscape will not work. And everything else has ground to a halt. Even BBEdit Lite is straining to keep up as I type this.
I won't bore you with the laundry list of other problems that I've encountered while working on various Macs running Linux , but suffice it to say there have been many, not the least of which is I've never seen a Mac running Linux that has run faster than its Wintel counterpart, despite the Macs' faster chip architecture. My 486/66 with 8 megs of ram runs faster than this 300 mhz machine at times. From a productivity standpoint, I don't get how people can claim that a Mac running Linux is a superior machine.
Mac addicts, flame me if you'd like, but I'd rather hear some intelligent reasons why anyone would choose to use a Mac over other faster, cheaper, more stable systems.
hahaha you're an idiot