From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder01.blueworldhosting.com!peer01.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!nx02.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!news-out.readnews.com!s09-03.readnews.com!not-for-mail
X-Trace: 
 DXC=KjW=8Kg9;hPfHoi1Wf_PfU[3OhcoN[H0PX44`8^\]>7Z25[I[UfBM:U>K`gGFg:INYMbH5`A_Xjn]4<Eg[2bSVmR1C4W?g`K:S_Yk3Pl^C@dI\
X-Complaints-To: abuse@ngroups.net
Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2014 19:56:33 +0200
From: Per Sandberg <per.s.sandberg@bahnhof.se>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
 rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: why the pascal family of languages (Pascal, Ada,
 Modula-2,2,Oberon,
 Delphi, Algol,...) failed compared to the C family?
References: <lq5qv9$hhk$1@speranza.aioe.org>
In-Reply-To: <lq5qv9$hhk$1@speranza.aioe.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <53cab152$0$32501$862e30e2@ngroups.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 74ac3e7a.ngroups.net
X-Received-Bytes: 1962
X-Received-Body-CRC: 3768325966
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:21064
Date: 2014-07-19T19:56:33+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Simple:
Because "{" and "}" is much cooler then "begin" and "end",  and to be 
cool is in much more important the to be right.

;)
/persan





On 16.07.2014 14:25, Nasser M. Abbasi wrote:
>
> The first language I really liked was Pascal.
> But the Pascal family of languages (including Ada) have
> clearly failed to become popular, at least compared
> to the C-family (C, C++, C#, ....)
>
> The question is why did this happen?
>
> My theory: C was used to develop Unix/Linux and
> Windows, and this made it easier for applications
> to be written in C/C++ since the interface to the OS
> was easier.  VMS did not choose C (considered a huge
> blunder by many. They choose Bliss
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLISS instead! and we
> all know what happens to VMS.
>
> What is your theory on this? Was there another
> reason or set of reasons?
>
> Can we all blame this success of the C family of
> languages on Dennis Ritchie and Brian Kernighan
> brilliance and it being used for Unix?
>
> --Nasser
>