Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I think (Algol) is richer, clearer and more expressive (than Go)

lua-users.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 21 posts

Re: I think (Algol) is richer, clearer and more expressive (than Go)

#2

Post by gcv »

While I don't speak Algol-68, I find the arguments interesting and enlightening... except for this bit: "state-of-the-art in programming languages hasn't moved much in those 41 years." While this is true to some extent, as mainstream dynamically typed languages pick up features from Lisp, I'd say that Haskell has a lot of new ideas. (I haven't yet figured out if those ideas help write better software, but that's more my failing than Haskell's.)

Re: I think (Algol) is richer, clearer and more expressive (than Go)

#3

Post by gruseom »

Interesting piece. Among other things, the origin of Common Lisp's infamous, love-it-or-hate-it LOOP macro is unmistakable here:

  # loop in 'for' mode
  for i from 1 to 10 do print(i) od
  # ...and in 'while' mode
  while i
Personally, I love LOOP; it's just so damn flexible and intuitive, even if there is something a little illicit about it. But no question it's as un-Lispy as you can get. How fitting that it turns out to have been embedded Algol all along.

Re: I think (Algol) is richer, clearer and more expressive (than Go)

#7

Post by ggruschow »

andreyf wrote: post #5

This is silly. ALGOL did not have a garbage collector. Nor did it support threads as well as Go does. Nor did it have interfaces. I'd go on, but comparing Go to ALGOL 68 just isn't anything close to serious.

Maybe the features he highlighted are as important to some people as the features you highlight.

Re: I think (Algol) is richer, clearer and more expressive (than Go)

#8

Post by j_baker »

chipdude wrote: post #4

I had no idea how much of today's code carries ALGOL DNA.

ALGOL invented most of the things you see in today's code. Loops, subroutines, and I believe dynamic allocation all came from ALGOL.

And the reality is that these things haven't really changed much. Most of the changes that modern languages bring are in the way of directives to the compiler/interpreter.

Re: I think (Algol) is richer, clearer and more expressive (than Go)

#9

Post by j_baker »

Let me say this... there's a reason why ALGOL 68 is no longer used very much. At the time it was criticized for being horrendously complex, and there is some truth to this.

Notice that the email points out all the different things you can do with ALGOL 68 compared to Go. If we were to compare all programming languages this way, wouldn't C++ be the best language ever?

Re: I think (Algol) is richer, clearer and more expressive (than Go)

#10

Post by j_baker »

ggruschow wrote: post #7
andreyf wrote: post #5

This is silly. ALGOL did not have a garbage collector. Nor did it support threads as well as Go does. Nor did it have interfaces. I'd go on, but comparing Go to ALGOL 68 just isn't anything close to serious.

Maybe the features he highlighted are as important to some people as the features you highlight.

You mean programmers in 1968? Of course.
Post reply on HN