I realize some people have shortened "C++" to "C", but they're not the same language. C does not have classses, garbage collection, or higher-order functions. Instead, it's the most elegant macro-assembler for the PDP machine code imaginable. Operators like "++" map directly to the machine instructions on the hardware it was created on.
Yes, this "dumb shit" considers your post to be as insulting, rude, off-topic, and misguided as the Westboro Baptists. I wouldn't have said so if I didn't think so.
And the orignal poster never said Ritchie was the only one who could have done it -- that's your misguided misinterpretation. The kindest I could describe your post as is "pedantic" -- nit picking over phrasing or grammar and ignoring the underlying intent.
So because the development of C-like constructs was theoretically inevitable, you don't think one of the men who actually did it deserves to be remembered for that?
Who should get the credit then?
Never mind. Don't answer that. There is no valid answer. You're obviously just a petty, jealous troll, protesting at the man's online memorial like a Westboro Baptist bigot at a military funeral.
It sickens me that companies like Apple and Samsung are flinging patents around, while great men like Dennis Ritchie who contributed so much more to the world never achieved anywhere near the riches of these technology leeches.
What ever happened to competing on the merits of your product instead of the size of your legal team?
Want to fix the patent system? Deny the rights of corporations to hold patents. Only the actual inventor or creator, a real flesh and blood human being, should be entitled to a patent.
EU law, yes -- it's a big enough market to be followed. But the article does not mention anything about Facebook violating EU regulations. It only mentions that it's Austrians raising the issues.
But no company follows the regulations of every nation where the internet reaches. Suppressionist regimes like Iran have such insane laws that it's IMPOSSIBLE to follow them all.
Dennis Ritchie had an impact on the technology world FAR beyond what Jobs and Apple could ever dream of. Do you have any idea how many billions of lines of C code are running in the world, or how many hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of Unix-derived systems are running? Linux, OS/X, AIX, Solaris, HP/UX -- they all owe their origins to this man. Rest in peace, sir.
Had he been a patent hound, he'd have died a rich man.
Unlike some governments, businesses are not subject to "Freedom of Information" queries.
Nor do you have any "rights" other than those set out in the terms of service, other than the right to refuse those terms and go elsewhere.
Surely these Austrians aren't naive enough to think they're going to shove their laws down an international organization's throat? If they object that strongly, try to have Facebook blocked and banned from Austria. That is and should be their only legal recourse -- you cannot have international organizations subject to the whims of every nation in the world that the internet reaches.
Granted, some organizations may capitulate to pressure from some governments rather than lose that audience/revenue stream, but that's their choice, and they can just as easily pull their operations as Google did with China.
Xerox makes some good stuff, but you have to look into their models pretty closely. One model I looked at was only $175, but toner cartridges for it were $200! I opted for my HP 1200 because cartridges were only $75 at the time, and the claimed pages-per-cartridge were the same as the Xerox.
Then when your cheap crap won't work under Linux, a new version of Windows, or OS/X, don't come whining to slashdot that there are no drivers available.
I don't understand why you'd want to outsource DNS. It's trivial to set up a DNS server, and I'd want to be able to remap servers on a whim in case any issues arose.
I set up a one-machine DNS on this box just so the VMWare image can be properly resolved by the host image. It took longer to download the latest bind software than it did to configure it.
The point is to avoid printers that require binary drivers or which try to leech off the system CPU to do the rasterization. Printers that do their own rasterization are not that much more expensive.
Personally I have an HP LaserJet 1200. It's served me well for many years, though it's cartridges are getting pretty pricy nowadays. Even with the price increases, though, it's still a lot cheaper to run than any inkjet I've ever seen.
When shopping for a printer, check the pricing and page counts on the cartridges. There are some real ripoffs out there. For example, one of the Xerox printers I looked at had cartridges that cost more than the printer itself!
They do not have an obligation to turn an obscene profit, short-term profits, a high stock-market value, nor to line the pockets of executives and board members with "golden parachute" options.
The whole world's corporations need to get back to research, innovation, and a focus on quality products. To hell with the hedge fund managers, the banks, and all the rest of the blood-suckers who do NOTHING for the economy except bleed it dry.
I refuse to buy a printer that doesn't support postscript. Who needs vendor-specific drivers when there have been standardized page-layout languages for decades?
Microsoft likes to blame third-party drivers for BSODs, but every single BSOD I've had over the past five years has been an ATAPI driver BSOD that has been an issue across several motherboards, hard drives, and DVD burners. I nave not had one single BSOD from a third-party driver in all the years I've used windows.
Then again, I don't buy the cheapest chinese hardware on the market, either. I stick with reputable vendors who know how to write drivers, like Intel.
There's a difference between fixing a bug and adding new features. Any competant developer will (eventually) find time to fix a bug, but if someone wants new features, the source is there so they can add the features themselves and offer them up for integration with the main development branch.
Way too many users think developers have nothing better to do than drop everything they're working on for their problem of the moment. They have no grasp of resource limitations, time constraints, feature-creep, prioritization, or anything other than the fact that they WANT something. The same is true regardless of whether the source is open or closed.
Case in point -- I've been working on my pet project for 15 years. It's finally getting close to being truly useful to other people. So what did my first user want? For me to go and write him a GUI for Eclipse, because he doesn't want to edit XML application models. Never mind that my license is INCOMPATIBLE with Eclipse.
Slashdot Mirror
Hmm. Guess that might support your idea that it was inevitable.
And if you ever tried programming in "B", you'd realize "C" didn't add that many new constructs. It was an evolution, not a revolution.
And you can't see how nitpicking about some theoretical "other language" is just being pedantic. History has already been written -- in "C".
Not Algol. Not Pascal. Not FORTAN. Not COBOL. Not Smalltalk. Not some other hypothetical language.
C
By the way, please continue with the cursing and insults. It makes your argument so much more convincing.
They were all written in C despite your trolling.
I still don't see where the OP said Ritchie was the only one who could have invented C or C-like constructs.
I realize some people have shortened "C++" to "C", but they're not the same language. C does not have classses, garbage collection, or higher-order functions. Instead, it's the most elegant macro-assembler for the PDP machine code imaginable. Operators like "++" map directly to the machine instructions on the hardware it was created on.
Yes, this "dumb shit" considers your post to be as insulting, rude, off-topic, and misguided as the Westboro Baptists. I wouldn't have said so if I didn't think so.
And the orignal poster never said Ritchie was the only one who could have done it -- that's your misguided misinterpretation. The kindest I could describe your post as is "pedantic" -- nit picking over phrasing or grammar and ignoring the underlying intent.
C was based on B, not BCPL.
I never thought of Kernighan and Ritchie as a "team of computer scientists", but if you insist on calling two people a "team", so be it.
Guess I'm abnormal. I value a good woman's companionship and friendship more than getting laid.
So because the development of C-like constructs was theoretically inevitable, you don't think one of the men who actually did it deserves to be remembered for that?
Who should get the credit then?
Never mind. Don't answer that. There is no valid answer. You're obviously just a petty, jealous troll, protesting at the man's online memorial like a Westboro Baptist bigot at a military funeral.
Until there's a way to put a corporation in jail, they should not have the same rights as people.
These childish patent wars have got to stop.
It sickens me that companies like Apple and Samsung are flinging patents around, while great men like Dennis Ritchie who contributed so much more to the world never achieved anywhere near the riches of these technology leeches.
What ever happened to competing on the merits of your product instead of the size of your legal team?
Want to fix the patent system? Deny the rights of corporations to hold patents. Only the actual inventor or creator, a real flesh and blood human being, should be entitled to a patent.
EU law, yes -- it's a big enough market to be followed. But the article does not mention anything about Facebook violating EU regulations. It only mentions that it's Austrians raising the issues.
But no company follows the regulations of every nation where the internet reaches. Suppressionist regimes like Iran have such insane laws that it's IMPOSSIBLE to follow them all.
$300,000 for this toy? Is that a misprint?
For that kind of money, I'd expect this thing to clean the house, cook dinner, mow the lawn, wash the car, and do the laundry.
Sorry, but I haven't run into a BSD system since the late '80s, so I forgot about it.
Dennis Ritchie had an impact on the technology world FAR beyond what Jobs and Apple could ever dream of. Do you have any idea how many billions of lines of C code are running in the world, or how many hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of Unix-derived systems are running? Linux, OS/X, AIX, Solaris, HP/UX -- they all owe their origins to this man. Rest in peace, sir.
Had he been a patent hound, he'd have died a rich man.
Unlike some governments, businesses are not subject to "Freedom of Information" queries.
Nor do you have any "rights" other than those set out in the terms of service, other than the right to refuse those terms and go elsewhere.
Surely these Austrians aren't naive enough to think they're going to shove their laws down an international organization's throat? If they object that strongly, try to have Facebook blocked and banned from Austria. That is and should be their only legal recourse -- you cannot have international organizations subject to the whims of every nation in the world that the internet reaches.
Granted, some organizations may capitulate to pressure from some governments rather than lose that audience/revenue stream, but that's their choice, and they can just as easily pull their operations as Google did with China.
Xerox makes some good stuff, but you have to look into their models pretty closely. One model I looked at was only $175, but toner cartridges for it were $200! I opted for my HP 1200 because cartridges were only $75 at the time, and the claimed pages-per-cartridge were the same as the Xerox.
Then when your cheap crap won't work under Linux, a new version of Windows, or OS/X, don't come whining to slashdot that there are no drivers available.
I don't understand why you'd want to outsource DNS. It's trivial to set up a DNS server, and I'd want to be able to remap servers on a whim in case any issues arose.
I set up a one-machine DNS on this box just so the VMWare image can be properly resolved by the host image. It took longer to download the latest bind software than it did to configure it.
PCL works as well as postscript.
The point is to avoid printers that require binary drivers or which try to leech off the system CPU to do the rasterization. Printers that do their own rasterization are not that much more expensive.
Personally I have an HP LaserJet 1200. It's served me well for many years, though it's cartridges are getting pretty pricy nowadays. Even with the price increases, though, it's still a lot cheaper to run than any inkjet I've ever seen.
When shopping for a printer, check the pricing and page counts on the cartridges. There are some real ripoffs out there. For example, one of the Xerox printers I looked at had cartridges that cost more than the printer itself!
Corporations have an obligation to turn a profit.
They do not have an obligation to turn an obscene profit, short-term profits, a high stock-market value, nor to line the pockets of executives and board members with "golden parachute" options.
The whole world's corporations need to get back to research, innovation, and a focus on quality products. To hell with the hedge fund managers, the banks, and all the rest of the blood-suckers who do NOTHING for the economy except bleed it dry.
I refuse to buy a printer that doesn't support postscript. Who needs vendor-specific drivers when there have been standardized page-layout languages for decades?
What good is the statute of limitations if the courts are going to arbitrarily ignore it? By what logic is the judge ignoring the law?
Microsoft likes to blame third-party drivers for BSODs, but every single BSOD I've had over the past five years has been an ATAPI driver BSOD that has been an issue across several motherboards, hard drives, and DVD burners. I nave not had one single BSOD from a third-party driver in all the years I've used windows.
Then again, I don't buy the cheapest chinese hardware on the market, either. I stick with reputable vendors who know how to write drivers, like Intel.
There's a difference between fixing a bug and adding new features. Any competant developer will (eventually) find time to fix a bug, but if someone wants new features, the source is there so they can add the features themselves and offer them up for integration with the main development branch.
Way too many users think developers have nothing better to do than drop everything they're working on for their problem of the moment. They have no grasp of resource limitations, time constraints, feature-creep, prioritization, or anything other than the fact that they WANT something. The same is true regardless of whether the source is open or closed.
Case in point -- I've been working on my pet project for 15 years. It's finally getting close to being truly useful to other people. So what did my first user want? For me to go and write him a GUI for Eclipse, because he doesn't want to edit XML application models. Never mind that my license is INCOMPATIBLE with Eclipse.