I don't have a good answer, in part because I think we're more than one change separated from an alternative history I'd be happy with.
-
-
Replying to @rygorous @1aprildaniels
Fabian, please share your alt.history.computing. Me, I'd ask the genie for "x:int" C++ declarations instead of "int x".
7 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @TimSweeneyEpic @1aprildaniels
I posted several answers already! But yeah, on minor syntactic things: absolutely Pascal-style types. Also "if cond {}" not "if (cond)" with
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
optional {}.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @rygorous @TimSweeneyEpic
also far fewer precedence levels with | on the same level as binary +, & << >> on the same level as binary *.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @rygorous @TimSweeneyEpic
and make DOS use - for arguments, / for path name separators, trailing : for NUL, CON, AUX, LPT1 etc. not optional.
1 reply 0 retweets 9 likes -
Replying to @rygorous @TimSweeneyEpic
make Unicode aware of >65535 CPs and spec UTF-8 before Windows ever tries to settle for 16-bit chars.
2 replies 0 retweets 13 likes -
Replying to @rygorous @TimSweeneyEpic
give CP/M a line discipline so CP/M and DOS text files have LF not CRLF line endings
2 replies 0 retweets 8 likes -
Replying to @rygorous @TimSweeneyEpic
(I'm pretty sure I could go on this for a long time, but I think that's enough for now!)
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @rygorous @TimSweeneyEpic
It’s amazing to think how all of these are very low-tech “simple” things, if only they were done N years ago;
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
I worry this is the twilight zone episode where we say this then they jump cut 40 years ahead and see we've created a new generation's woes.
-
-
Replying to @TimSweeneyEpic @aras_p0 replies 0 retweets 3 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.