Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Which people and groups are researching new approaches to programming?

news.ycombinator.com

31–40 of 123 posts

Re: Ask HN: Which people and groups are researching new approaches to programming?

#32

Me. I'm working on Full Metal Jacket, a strongly-typed, visual, pure dataflow language ( http://web.onetel.com/~hibou/fmj/FMJ.html ) with its own IDE. Things have advanced a fair bit since I wrote those pages, and published the recent paper, so I'll add to the tutorials very soon, and announce this in Hacker News. Type definition, macros, and a few other things have been added to the language. .303 shared-source rele…

neat, would be cool to have some pictures on the front page.

Re: Ask HN: Which people and groups are researching new approaches to programming?

#35
post #28

Personally I think in the next 30 years we will be programming with thesame languages popular today. They will evolve to handle multicore better though. With tasks, async, couruoutines, actors, etc. Before too long we will have a mix of thousands of cores. Gpu, cpu, remote cores. We will have to figure out how to spread our programs across all of them. Well all be doing supercomputing.

Before looking ahead, it's well-worth looking back to see how far we've come. Things have changed a lot over the last 30 years, and I'll be very disappointed if they don't change much over the next 30. In 1986, C++, Java, C#, Perl, Python, and JavaScript didn't exist. The web was a small project unheard of outside of CERN. Much of computing was done in COBOL on mainframes. Garbage collected languages weren't used much. Things haven't progressed uniformly, and in some areas have actually regressed (I miss Lisp Machines), but mainstream computing is well ahead of where it was then.

I also don't think you can simply graft supercomputing onto mainstream (i.e. Algol-descended) languages and expect to keep all your cores equally busy. You might get away with some SIMD parallelism, but MIMD parallelism, and quantum computing, require completely different approaches, and completely different programming mindsets.

Re: Ask HN: Which people and groups are researching new approaches to programming?

#37
I'm working in a relational language like http://www.try-alf.org/blog/2013-10-21-relations-as-first-cl....

However a noob in building a language ;)

I have learn a lot of stuff. For example, columnar-stores provide some nice oportunities to manage data in-memory + compress values in columns.

Sorting, joining & selecting on multiple-arrays that are a necessity for OLAP queries translate well to the need of normal programming.

SQL is a overcomplication and a bad "programming" language. Unfortunately, the only practical way to interface with most databases.

If my plan work, this could be good to build a relational store, that with let your to say: The name is a string, and I need to search on it. A normal engine will need to store it again in a index. I will say instead, the name column is the index and the values are stored once.

Or something like that.

BTW: A relation have some simmetry with inmutable functions, but I still don't know how exploit this fact

Re: Ask HN: Which people and groups are researching new approaches to programming?

#39
It might be worth checking out ethereum.org and the work they are doing there on their blockchain, as well as serpent / solidity programming languages. Also, check out ipfs. The distributed computation and storage model has broad applicability, and a good lens from which to view the world.

Re: Ask HN: Which people and groups are researching new approaches to programming?

#40

I think you'd probably be interested by the Viewpoint Research (and Alan Kay): http://vpri.org/index.html ...and STEPS: http://www.vpri.org/pdf/tr2011004_steps11.pdf "We set a limit of 20,000 lines of code to express all of the “runnable meaning” of personal computing (“from the end‑user down to the metal”) where “runnable meaning” means that the system will run with just this code (but could have added optimizations…

On the 5th year report (that you linked to), they mentioned that they had funding for another year and a final report. It's unfortunate that there was never a 6th year final report to wrap up the project.
Post reply on HN