XPost: alt.folklore.computers   
   From: ldo@nz.invalid   
      
   On Mon, 5 Jan 2026 11:50:58 -0800, John Ames wrote:   
      
   > On Mon, 5 Jan 2026 12:33:53 -0700   
   > Peter Flass  wrote:   
   >   
   >> Actually, many systems programming languages have no I/O, the idea   
   >> being that non-OS programs call the OS to do the I/O, and the OS   
   >> interacts directly with the hardware.   
   >   
   > "Systems programming" usually implies implementation of an OS, though,   
   > and IIRC that was the sense that Kernighan was using. You can't excuse   
   > limitations by "oh, the OS handles that" when your program *is* the OS.*   
      
   That’s precisely the point that Peter Flass was trying to make: the   
   lack of built-in I/O features in a language designed to implement   
   operating systems isn’t a bug, it’s a feature.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)