71–80 of 120 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Some saw Exceptions as the advance in error handling we need while Go reverts back to error codes. Just a note that Go generally uses strings for error handling, not error codes. This avoids the need to look up the meaning of each error codes in a table somewhere.
How are errors typically localised?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Haskell was designed by committee, and it's exactly the opposite of the stereotype: it's a small language with orthogonal features and a clean syntax. The few "features" the language has, like list comprehensions and do notation, are defined by simple translations into the rest of the language. http://www.haskell.org/onlinereport/
And conversely, Ada was designed by one man, and if you weren't aware of that historical fact and just looked at the language spec, you'd swear it was the classic example of committee design. Fred Brooks' dictum that design should be done by a single mind, or at most two, is a guideline not a rule.
http://cs.fit.edu/~ryan/ada/ada-hist.html
"The Ada design team was led by Jean D. Ichbiah and has included Berned Krieg-Bruechner, Brain A. Wichmann, Henry F. Ledgard, Jean-Cluade Heliard, Jean-Loup Gailly, Jean-Ryanmond Abrial, John G. P. Barnes, Mike Woodger, Olivier Roubine, Paul N. Hilfinger, and Robert Firth."
I appreciate this article by someone who is serious about contributing useful solutions to the world--not just the social aspect of programming--and appreciates a language that empowers him to develop those useful solutions as readily as possible. When I'm not programming I like to get some distance from my work and hang out with people who have diverse interests. When I'm serious about programming I use Common Lisp.…
Something I never quite understood about languages was why they are restricted to one or another domain. For example the author writes: Algebraic types? Dependent types? You'll never see them. They're too ... research-y Why can't those features be baked into C++ or Java?
I think C++ is full now.
If you're going to rant, you might want to actually have a clear point to make. > college kids on comp.lang.lisp asking for the answers for problem-set 3 on last night's homework Surely not during the Naggum days. CLL was a hostile wasteland. > That is the lesson of perl and python and all these other languages. They're not good for anything. They suck. And they suck in libraries and syntax and semantics and weirdnes…
> What? How have you not heard of CPAN? There is not a single language in the world that can touch Perl's libraries. That's a really outdated meme. CPAN is small, pretty much every language you hear about regularly has a larger package space than CPAN. Even Go's package space is bigger than CPAN's. JS and Java each have package spaces roughly 3x CPAN's size. http://www.modulecounts.com/
However GoDoc seems to be showing number of package namespaces. If so this would be more comparable to the module count on CPAN (see http://www.cpan.org/)
So at this point in time we have:
GoDoc: 36,497
CPAN dists: 30,216
CPAN modules: 137,603Something I never quite understood about languages was why they are restricted to one or another domain. For example the author writes: Algebraic types? Dependent types? You'll never see them. They're too ... research-y Why can't those features be baked into C++ or Java?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And conversely, Ada was designed by one man, and if you weren't aware of that historical fact and just looked at the language spec, you'd swear it was the classic example of committee design. Fred Brooks' dictum that design should be done by a single mind, or at most two, is a guideline not a rule.
>Ada was designed by one man http://cs.fit.edu/~ryan/ada/ada-hist.html "The Ada design team was led by Jean D. Ichbiah and has included Berned Krieg-Bruechner, Brain A. Wichmann, Henry F. Ledgard, Jean-Cluade Heliard, Jean-Loup Gailly, Jean-Ryanmond Abrial, John G. P. Barnes, Mike Woodger, Olivier Roubine, Paul N. Hilfinger, and Robert Firth."
If you're going to rant, you might want to actually have a clear point to make. > college kids on comp.lang.lisp asking for the answers for problem-set 3 on last night's homework Surely not during the Naggum days. CLL was a hostile wasteland. > That is the lesson of perl and python and all these other languages. They're not good for anything. They suck. And they suck in libraries and syntax and semantics and weirdnes…
> It's a language designed by committee, and it looks like it. This means nothing. When a design succeeds, we say it was designed by the community; when it fails, by committee. You can produce examples for any language: In Common Lisp the committee that designed it and the community of previous Lisp users that backed it. For Python, the community of users and Guidos' mailing list pals. There is nothing inherently sup…
Extremely well said.
If you're going to rant, you might want to actually have a clear point to make. > college kids on comp.lang.lisp asking for the answers for problem-set 3 on last night's homework Surely not during the Naggum days. CLL was a hostile wasteland. > That is the lesson of perl and python and all these other languages. They're not good for anything. They suck. And they suck in libraries and syntax and semantics and weirdnes…
"Languages don't matter. Platforms matter. APIs matter. Playing nicely with the rest of the world fucking matters." Nice, I like that. Reminds me of the Discourse peeps, who rejected eg PHP, and wrote it in their pet language, ignoring that no-one cares about language, and finding the problem that their platform is so difficult to install and use, that no-one uses their software.
Yeah, why should users ever care about language? Users generally don't know what the heck this "language" thing is. At least if it's not French, English, Chinese or something like that.
Now, for developers, not caring about a language they use is very short-sighted, to say the least.
If you're going to rant, you might want to actually have a clear point to make. > college kids on comp.lang.lisp asking for the answers for problem-set 3 on last night's homework Surely not during the Naggum days. CLL was a hostile wasteland. > That is the lesson of perl and python and all these other languages. They're not good for anything. They suck. And they suck in libraries and syntax and semantics and weirdnes…
> What? How have you not heard of CPAN? There is not a single language in the world that can touch Perl's libraries. That's a really outdated meme. CPAN is small, pretty much every language you hear about regularly has a larger package space than CPAN. Even Go's package space is bigger than CPAN's. JS and Java each have package spaces roughly 3x CPAN's size. http://www.modulecounts.com/
There are a couple of CPAN module installers, and every one of them, by default, will not install the target module if there are any test failures.
Honest question: are there any other languages that do that? I last looked a few years ago, and it didn't seem to be the case.