11–20 of 257 posts
One way you might arranging programming languages in a 2D space is with two axes: 1. How much should the language surprise you? 2. When the language does surprise you, should it delight you or horrify you? surprising ^ | | | delight horrify | | | v unsurprising Only a sadist would deliberately design a language for the top right quadrant, but there are many esoteric languages in there. I think most people tacitly ass…
I'm very interested in bottom right langs.
One way you might arranging programming languages in a 2D space is with two axes: 1. How much should the language surprise you? 2. When the language does surprise you, should it delight you or horrify you? surprising ^ | | | delight horrify | | | v unsurprising Only a sadist would deliberately design a language for the top right quadrant, but there are many esoteric languages in there. I think most people tacitly ass…
One way you might arranging programming languages in a 2D space is with two axes: 1. How much should the language surprise you? 2. When the language does surprise you, should it delight you or horrify you? surprising ^ | | | delight horrify | | | v unsurprising Only a sadist would deliberately design a language for the top right quadrant, but there are many esoteric languages in there. I think most people tacitly ass…
Other people I showed it to felt it was more on the horrifying side, but like I said, it's subjective.
It's worth remembering that Raku originated as "Perl 6" and a lot of design philosophies are derived from Perlisms in the first place. The author seems to be unfamiliar with both Perl and Raku's history, given that he immediately comments on the x operator for repeating strings. Which has been the case for many decades of Perl. :)
FTA: "The regex syntax isn't backwards compatible with Perl 5. For thirty years languages followed the PCRE "standard" and Perl 6 just… threw it all away." so it looks like the author has at least passing familiarity.
Perl wasn't following the PCRE standard. It was the PCRE standard. Everything else was following it. Usually with some piece missing--far more implementations should have the /x modifier.
The Perl 6 design process didn't throw it away after 30 years. It threw it away with less than 10 years. There was already widespread knowledge that Perl had gone beyond "regular expressions", and IIRC, that was even before it had implemented recursive expressions. Perl 6 would be "patterns", and they would be good enough to be used as a full grammar. The language itself could be parsed in it, and Raku sometimes is, depending on the implementation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Only old C++, new C++ creeps up the y axis.
Interesting perspective. It surprises you in exactly how , but not very in that it will . (Horrify you. But it also delights sometimes. We need more dimensions?)