The definition of "C-Style language" can practically be simplified down to "uses curly braces ({})." Why do we use that particular character (and why not something more reasonable, like [], which doesn't require the shift key at least on US keyboards)?
Wikipedia tells us that C uses said braces...
The biggest problem that I perceive with it is a lack of research / utility. That is a difficult thing to fix.
2
user55340
@SomeKittens "Why" questions are especially challenging for historical things - that unless one is able to find documentation to state it one way or another, it is mostly speculation. Speculation can have a multitude of answers, all of which equally correct in speculation. That is difficult to fit into the SE Q&A format.
@SomeKittens personally (and realizing my bias in this), I would suggest leaving it closed. Changing the fundamental nature of the question makes the existing answers not quite answering the question you are asking. There is nothing wrong with a closed question.
Looking at that question, I don't think it's a bad question. It's just not answerable by our user base. I highly doubt any user can give an authoritative answer, and it's just generating speculation. Perhaps there's something out there that explains why the creators of C used curly braces, but given that there's only speculation so far, I don't hold out much hope of that happening.
@MichaelT It's intentional. Migrated posts will eventually be deleted.
If anyone has a link to the PM question, they'll get auto-redirected to Programmers. But if you click on the link in the migration notice, you don't get redirected.
I cleared the migration history from the question. The user hasn't followed it. Hopefully, though, someone who knows about FPA will answer it.
user55340
Just wondering - I dont think I've seen it so removed rapidly after migration. I wonder if they are useful to people of looking for something and then finding themselves on a site that is more appropriate... for those that actually read and notice things.
@MichaelT The question has been on P.SE for a long time...
IT was migrated almost a year ago.
user55340
Ahh, well... you can see how good of a reader I am.
user55340
I'm curious again - would it be useful to have a slightly different message then - rather than one of "removed for moderation" which has a negative connotation... to something more like "has been migrated to another site"?
@MichaelT I don't know how easy that would be. Technically, it was removed as part of the moderation activities, although it was probably an automated process.
@ThomasOwens bad or not, but question comments appear to degrade into meta content dispute, revision history shows quick closure and even quicker reopen, accompanied with new close votes coming at it- again, making a heavy smell of meta content dispute. Is there an established / common way for moderators to handle stuff like that?
There are timed locks. We can make a Meta post (if one doesn't exist), link to it, pull out relevant comments, clean things up, and let people iron things out in Meta appropraitely.
I'd say flag it. I'll ping someone else - I've got a meeting soon.
And with that, I'm off to my meeting. Have a nice, constructive Meta discussion, guys.
I'll check in with it after work today, if not sooner.
1 hour later…
user55340
8:57 PM
Trying to formulate an answer to that meta question... the "history" tag has had changes over time as to what is acceptable. Quoting a mid '11 answer about "history on topic" and then having a contest that has a theme of history for a week in may '12 seems to conflict - that history can be on topic now.
user55340
Granted, its a year later, so maybe the pendulum has swung the other way.
The latest example is here:
Why are actual parameters called "arguments"?
Note that the OP is not asking for the difference between "parameters" and "arguments," or even what the word means, but merely how the word came to be used in the software development context.
I find these que...
Save for the accepted answer, I thought the semicolons question was pretty good. Programming history has always been an overlooked aspect of Programmers's scope.
user20683
@MichaelT I'm firmly on the side of Programming History questions are OT if they can be backed up by objective evidence
user55340
O(ff|n)Topic?
user20683
on
user20683
sorry
user20683
been a rough couple of days
user20683
9:03 PM
topically correct
user20683
shall we say
user20683
Topically Incorrect: TI TI TI...Uh Oh...
user20683
:P
user55340
At least this isn't Math.SE where one could be topically correct, but topologically incorrect.
user20683
@MichaelT you could have a bad graph algorithm
user20683
9:04 PM
or a bad network setup
user20683
typically those are suboptimal rather than incorrect though
user55340
I was trying to be humerus... but this isn't anatomy.SE where I would be boned for such a pun.
user20683
@MichaelT I broke my humerus once...it wasn't funny. Drums + symbol crash
Anybody know of decent languages that are easy to bootstrap such that they can run compatibly with an interperated language, say, written by the CEO's nephew in 1978?
I pretty much get the stuff in that link - but if I try to do C++ in BLUB-- I have to do a lot because C++ just doesn't work that way. I'm looking for an existing language that DOES work that way. (And scheme was my best guess.)
So, if it were possible to write, say, a scheme interpereter in BLUB with a relatively quick bootstrap such that it could quickly run the rest of scheme, that might be a good way to do it.
The question is whether the embedded language is easy to bootstrap. I have heard that this was either true or a goal for LISP, Smalltalk, and Forth, but I'm not sure how easy they would really be. And Smalltalk has that whole single image thing, which would seem to be problematic.
That is an interesting article. A finished version of such a thing would be a great read!
user55340
Ahh, the history of history questions. Ghads, there is a lot to it.
user20683
@MichaelT It's like all the other scope questions on Programmers
user20683
it's the trouble with being statically typed and dynamically scoped
user55340
10:10 PM
The best answer to the "are they on topic" seems to be "a number of high level people have given a qualified yes at one time or another - and a number of people have had issue with specific questions that fall into that category."
user55340
The thing I disagree with the most was closing because of a single meta post some time ago - ignoring everything else between then and now. I am certain that I can find a meta post that has a consensus for any opinion I may have.
user20683
@MichaelT as I've stated before, I'm mostly a yes on these particular things
user55340
btw, @raspi - I notice your DNS question... do you have questions about your question?
user55340
I would be tempted to say "no, it shouldn't have it because php does - and php is a bad example of what to do."
user20683
@MichaelT unless Yannis Rizos is doing it in PHP
user20683
10:17 PM
then it's probably a good example but you might want a second opinion anywya
user55340
From The 12 networking truths - "... perfection has been reached not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away." - the same is true for writing a language.
user55340
There exists some networking support, but its often rather rudimentary - mapping to the system calls on the box rather than trying to make a fancy library for it.
@MichaelT Yeah. Just wondering how it's rant, bad, I must be burned alive and then be fed to fish etc.. :) I'll might try to approach it more from teaching point of view of robustness. Like usually sockets are teached somewhat "here's socket, just use it, don't worry about connection problems! it will work!" and this leads to that easy to use function usage.. or something like that.
user20683
@raspi the bit at the end appears to some to be a rant.
I'm not native english speaker, so... I just tried to get possible answers from many perspectives with that. like language, os, teaching, etc perspectives