Theoretically, yes.  Nothing is perfect.  Many programmers like to=20
#define stuff to make the language more palatable, like:

#define FOREVER for(;;)

BUT, to change something like case fallthrough, or how else attaches to=20
ifs would be totally unacceptable, no matter how much it would 'improve'=20
C.  You could make a new language that is exactly like C except for the=20
things you'd like improved and call it something else, like ANSI C, C++,=20
C--, C#, Cflat, Cspotrun, or even D.  But 'improving' C by making it=20
incompatible with C would be like MicroChip 'improving' the pinout of=20
the 16F887 but still selling it as a 16F887.

Kerry


Sergey Dryga wrote:
> Agree, any language, including C, can be improved.  C is definitely a pro=
duct of
> its time and since computer sciences and applications have advanced, the
> original C is not adequate any more.  So it has evolved a bit. =20
>
> If one follows all suggestions by Stroustrup, would we not get C++? =20
>
> My comment was actually targeted to the specific discussions on this list=
 as to
> which language is best.  It seems like C vs assembler vs Jal vs whatever
> discussions ignite very often and I wanted to point out that there is a r=
ight
> tool for every specific applcation.=20
>
> Sergey Dryga
>
> http://beaglerobotics.com
>
>
>
>  =20



--=20
Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.289 / Virus Database: 267.11.13 - Release Date: 10/6/05

--=20
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.