>> FOSS definitely helped C a lot, even before it was called that.  =20
>> First there was the portable C compiler, which lasted through the =20
>> late 1980s.  Then there was gcc.

> And lets not forget MAD (Michigan Algorithm Decoder) running on IBM =20
> 709 (vacuum tubes) and 7090 (solid state) in the early 1960's. It =20
> helped a lot to have Alfred E. Newman's picture on the cover. :)  =20
> Then in the mid 1970's there was Basic running on a Univac 1108.

I can't tell whether you're making fun of my "ancient history" or if =20
you're serious.  I claim it was in the 80s that C pulled ahead of =20
everything else, so to figure out why, you need to look at the things =20
that happened in the late 70s and early 80s.

I suppose the policies of mainframe and larger computer vendors toward =20
universities had a lot to do with things.  Waterloo Fortran, Dartmouth =20
and Stonybrook Basic, Cornell PL/C, Stanford SAIL, Rutgers Pascal, =20
Penn APL, who knows how many LISP implementations...  But nothing =20
aimed at microcontrollers; there were CP/M machines, 6502 SBCs, and =20
small PDP/11s around, but I'm not aware of anyone doing language =20
development for them (I was sort of mainframe-oriented in those days, =20
so I could be mistaken.  But I certainly recall that most languages =20
for micros came from entrepreneurial hackers like Bill Gates.)  I =20
guess part of the problem was the lack of storage on a lot of those =20
micros.  Cross-compilers for mainframes weren't very interesting to =20
the people without a mainframe, and the people that did have the =20
mainframe were writing other stuff...)

BillW

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