> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Ivan Shmakov <oneing...@gmail.com> wrote: >> arnuld uttre <arnuld.miz...@gmail.com> writes:
> The hardware has gone beyond any imagination of virtually any > XIX century's person, but the English language that we're > currently using is still pretty much the same as it was over a > century ago. > > Is that a problem? Perhaps. Should we switch to, say, > Esperanto instead? Perhaps, but I find that unlikely to happen. Humans of this centuary have same limbs and same brain as of those from an earlier century, they don't develop like machines, so the comparison is like comparing pumpkin with lemon. > This would likely to be a completely insane amount of work, even > if only the pure typing is considered. hmmm.... yeah... right. > … And what about Intel C vs. GCC? > > FWIW, I have to admit that those Intel folks know their > processors quite well, and their compilers are fast. > > Fortunately, I'm not a performance freak, so I may focus on > freedom instead. And in that respect, GCC and Clang are still > unbeaten. I too focus on freedom and thats why I never ever work on softwares using BSD-like licenses. I don't give away the hard work to corporations. GPL is the only license for me. -- http://uttre.wordpress.com/2008/05/14/the-lost-love-of-mine/
