Re:Linus Torvalds apologizes for his behavior, takes time off
by hoosieree on Sunday September 16, 2018 @06:32PM
(#18001606)
This is somewhat ironic considering Linux is written in C, which is the most stubbornly "one thing at a time" language in widespread use today.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Linus Torvalds apologizes for his behavior, takes time off
by twtw on Sunday September 16, 2018 @06:51PM
(#18001713)
It's not ironic at all. C doesn't not do anything promoting a syscall per byte. Even if you think that's what you are doing, libc is probably buffering for you behind the scenes.
Re:Linus Torvalds apologizes for his behavior, takes time off
by LukeShu on Sunday September 16, 2018 @07:21PM
(#18001842)
If you're using fopen(3) "stdio" (buffered I/O), then yeah, fread(3) and friends will buffer. But if you're using open(2) and read(2), libc's not going to buffer that.
Re:Linus Torvalds apologizes for his behavior, takes time off
by umanwizard on Sunday September 16, 2018 @09:07PM
(#18002368)
For example?
Re:Linus Torvalds apologizes for his behavior, takes time off
by hoosieree on Tuesday September 25, 2018 @07:32PM
(#18071458)
- C-style strings are null-terminated, with no information about their length
- no equivalent of "for item in items" or "map" because no native data type has any concept of its length
- array-to-pointer decay
Modern assembly languages - for processors that have SIMD or AVX instructions - are more natively able to deal with several things at one time than C is.