Re: Python (was Re: I did not inhale)

On 22/08/2024 01:43, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

On Wed, 21 Aug 2024 11:11:46 +0200, David Brown wrote:
 

On 21/08/2024 09:38, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

>
On Wed, 21 Aug 2024 09:26:41 +0200, David Brown wrote:
>

And you don't need to know anything about Linux, UNIX or POSIX to
program in C.

>
I think the point has been made on comp.lang.c more than once, that C
without POSIX can be a very dull language indeed ...

>
It was wrong on comp.lang.c, and it is wrong here.  Proof by repeated
assertion is not valid.

 It came up repeatedly because of repeated examples where it was true.

It takes but one single counter-example to invalidate general claims like this.  And for almost the entire branch of small-systems embedded programming, code is mostly written in C, POSIX is utterly irrelevant, and the work is not dull.
Then there are those that - wisely or unwisely - program in C for Windows, without POSIX.
Then there are those that program in C and use libraries, abstractions or other layers between their own code and the underlying POSIX systems.
Then there are those that write portable C code that does not depend on any OS at all.
I have no statistics, but I'd imagine that it's actually only a small fraction of C programmers that have direct regular contact with POSIX in most of their regular work.  C coding is not usually about how you access a file, or how you start a thread - it's about what you do with the file contents and the code that runs in the thread.
So - you are still wrong, even if others have said the same thing as you did.