Why Pascal is not my favorite programming language (1981) [pdf]

Some of his grievances:

Lack of external static storage class, the pinnacle of C programming.

Lack of oh so powerful C strings, terminating in zero (hopefully).

"There is no way to override the type mechanism when necessary, nothing analogous to the "cast" mechanism in C."

"begin" and "end" are bulky compared to { and }.

This is not a very accurate summary of said article. In fact it is inaccurate enough to call it lying.

That's not a summary. That's a number of quotes demonstrating Mr. Kernighan's judgements about PL virtues that didn't stand the test of time.

It's a significantly incomplete list - and absolutely not a list of "quotes" as none of the items in your list appear in the article:

>Lack of external static storage class, the pinnacle of C programming.

>Lack of oh so powerful C strings, terminating in zero (hopefully).

>"There is no way to override the type mechanism when necessary, nothing analogous to the "cast" mechanism in C."

>"begin" and "end" are bulky compared to { and }.

In my opinion these are some of the less significant arguments. Your post never stated that it contains merely a subset a subset and instead claims to refute or weaken the overall proposal. I agree with the previous poster that this is a form of lying.

For instance, you ignored one of the very first and most significant points, "The size of an array is part of its type" which means that " it makes it difficult indeed to create a library of routines for doing common, general-purpose operations like sorting"

Incidentally, those are examples of quotes i.e. verbatim excerpts from the article.