Seems to be in the same category as Lua. Can a PL nerd explain what's different about it?
Cyberscript
21–30 of 65 posts
Re: Cyberscript
#22Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the 90s/2000s people also used to shorten cybersex to cyber. I guess if they wanted to have fun with it they could add a "Wanna Cyber?" in place of the usual "Try ".
It drove me nuts in the cryptocurrency boom that people shortened cryptocurrency to "crypto". As in, "I'm into crypto" or "I work in crypto". Cryptography is much older than bitcoin.
Re: Cyberscript
#23Re: Cyberscript
#24This is by far the most stupid name for a new language imaginable. Shortening it to "cyber" on the landing page too.. When will devs learn that being able to search for a term on the open internet without having it polluted by normal language is kind of important
Google's Go has made finding info on the ancient Chinese board game generally referred to in English by its Japanese name Go difficult. This has has interestingly lead to increased use of its original name Weiqi or its Korean name Baduk.
Re: Cyberscript
#25I think (outside hobbies) new programming language development is basically dead at this point. The major use cases have been filled, and there are more forces than ever towards using a battle-tested language with a massive ecosystem. Further, less and less code is being written or read by humans so the actual language ergonomics matter less than ever to those who would fund new language creation.
Re: Cyberscript
#26Seems to be in the same category as Lua. Can a PL nerd explain what's different about it?
Lua has users. Network effects are important. (I have a PhD in programming languages.)
Re: Cyberscript
#27I think (outside hobbies) new programming language development is basically dead at this point. The major use cases have been filled, and there are more forces than ever towards using a battle-tested language with a massive ecosystem. Further, less and less code is being written or read by humans so the actual language ergonomics matter less than ever to those who would fund new language creation.
This talk argues there are many purposes for formal languages other than programming: https://medium.com/bits-and-behavior/my-splash-2016-keynote-...
So it may be true that "programming language" development is done, but there are many more applications for formal languages than just writing apps and websites and such.
Moreover, it may be true that less code as a proportion of all code is being written or read by humans. But more humans today are reading and writing code than ever before. So the ability to express unambiguous ideas to agents using formal langauges is more important than ever, even if people are only reading/writing a small proportion of all code.
Similarly, it's not true that because agents will be reading / writing code that language ergonomics do not matter. Agents have resource restrictions like token budgets, and they are also trained using human knowledge and conventions. Ergonomics apply to agents just as they do humans; languages which are verbose require more tokens to write, languages that can be verified are more useful in agentic loops, languages with live compiler introspection and interpreters can give fast results to agents etc.
So I hold exactly the opposite view: it's not clear to me why languages built 30 years ago in a world where the Internet barely existed would be accidentally ideal for AI agents in 2026 to the pint we can say the whole field is solved for good (and no, I don't think the amount of training data on those languages seals the fate because that status is ephemeral and also it's not clear training on one language corpus isn't transferrable to other languages).
Re: Cyberscript
#28This is by far the most stupid name for a new language imaginable. Shortening it to "cyber" on the landing page too.. When will devs learn that being able to search for a term on the open internet without having it polluted by normal language is kind of important
Re: Cyberscript
#29I think (outside hobbies) new programming language development is basically dead at this point. The major use cases have been filled, and there are more forces than ever towards using a battle-tested language with a massive ecosystem. Further, less and less code is being written or read by humans so the actual language ergonomics matter less than ever to those who would fund new language creation.
Re: Cyberscript
#30This is by far the most stupid name for a new language imaginable. Shortening it to "cyber" on the landing page too.. When will devs learn that being able to search for a term on the open internet without having it polluted by normal language is kind of important
In the 90s/2000s people also used to shorten cybersex to cyber. I guess if they wanted to have fun with it they could add a "Wanna Cyber?" in place of the usual "Try ".