On Mon, 23 Oct 2006 22:39:00 GMT, Grumman-581
wrote:

Roger (K8RI) wrote:
And they finally gave us the ability to turn the type checking on.
:-)) Originally it just assumed the programmer knew what they were
doing and let you do it what ever it was. Lordy...pointers with
dynamic memory, dynamic arrays, linked lists, circular linked lists
and bidirectional linked lists. It gave the programmer a good feel
for the two words, new and free. :-)) Oh yah, and memory leaks.

Wow, expecting engineers to do it correctly... Radical concept, eh? grin

Radical huh? :-))

With regards to type checking, well, you just ran 'lint' on your code to

This was before ANSI C and lint.

give yourself a better feel for it... I liked the level of strictness
with regards to type checking in standard 'C'... I hated what Ada

The original C didn't have any type checking. You could add, or
combine anything with anything regardless of type be it an address,
integer, floating point, pointer, array, string, ordinal value, what
ever. It added a new dimension to debugging:-))

Never have worked with Ada.

required us to do... More often than not, things became a system.address
type in Ada for what I was having to do...

You can be object oriented in standard 'C', it just takes the right
frame of mind... While I was working on a NASA contract for the MCC and

"Object Oriented" is really a programming concept although we tend to
think of specific languages such as Delphi and C++ as being Object
Oriented. If the programmer properly organizes the language he is
using he can create the same inheritance and relationships in most
languages although being able to define a variable as local or global
makes it a tad easier. Of course global makes it easier to defeat the
whole concept too.

SSCC, we utilized this technique. Here's a write-up that I did on it
awhile back describing it:

http://grumman581.googlepages.com/object-oriented-c

We had a lot of different groups each working on different portions of
the entire system and these would be linked at a later date and expected
to work together. Collisions at link time were not acceptable.

You mean something like a number of modules/routines using the same
variable name defined locally and then some one assigns it global? Or
assigning a value to an address that some one else uses for something
else.? I don't know how many times I accidentally assigned global or
local wrongly. I haven't done any programming in C or even C++ in a
long time. (I've been retired 10 years now)

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com