To:	jims AT eos DOT arc DOT nasa DOT gov
Cc:	opendos AT delorie DOT com
References:	<199709202220 DOT PAA13936 AT eos DOT arc DOT nasa DOT gov>
Message-Id:	<ABACF9q4K1@belous.munic.msk.su>
From:	"Arkady V.Belousov" <ark AT belous DOT munic DOT msk DOT su>
Date:	Sun, 21 Sep 1997 14:12:26 +0400 (MSD)
Organization:	Locus
Reply-To:	ark AT mos DOT ru
Subject:	Re: source code
Lines:	28
MIME-Version:	1.0

X-Comment-To: Jim Stevenson Ph.D

Hi!

20-σΕΞ-97 15:20 jims AT eos DOT arc DOT nasa DOT gov (Jim Stevenson Ph.D) wrote to opendos AT delorie DOT com, tbird AT caldera DOT com:

 > In what language is the source code?
 > How can anyone expect benefits from release of code, when the expected code
 > has not been withdrawn?

     Almost we want _analyze_ code, but not to compile. In this case almost
languages (except, may be, extremes like APL) be satisfactory (of course,
good style and enough commenting help us to read and developers to write).

 > This is why the world is programmed in c,

     ...and this is also why so many bugs found in modern programs. :( C is
not best language. At least, for "novice"s, who is majority.

 > and not the IBM development language, which they keep a big secret.

     Nothing secret. For example, part of OS/2 compiled by old MSC.

 > Anyone else getting more interested in linux, with its already available
 > source, and ability to multitask?
 > So what is any advantage of any Dos over linux?

     DOS is less exacting.

- Raw text -