View mode: basic / threaded / horizontal-split · Log in · Help
November 09, 2007
Re: what is the definition of new programming language
0ffh wrote:
> Perl is such a fupped language [*], [...]

to be fair I should have added [*]:
"outside the set of it's originally intended set of use cases"

Regards, Frank
November 09, 2007
Re: what is the definition of new programming language
I think that you'd better ask yourself whether it was truly C++ which 
excited you or because it was your first introduction to object-oriented 
programming, generic programming..

So, no D doesn't provide a new "paradigm", but it's still a much better 
language than C++ is..

Regards,
renoX


Sean a écrit :
> Maybe this is an old topic or maybe this is a stupid question. But I
> am really confusing about it. I learned C programming language in
> high school, and then I learned C++ in the first year in university.
> C++ likes opening a new world to me and gives me a new feeling about
> how to think the problems and how to construct the programs. The D
> language has lots of good features, I am exciting about these
> features, but I can not feel as exciting as when I learn the C++
> language. I do not know weather because it does not have a new
> thinking style about how to programming or something else. Anyway, it
> is a really good language. But what is the definition of new
> programming language?
>
November 09, 2007
Re: what is the definition of new programming language
0ffh Wrote:

> 0ffh wrote:
> > Perl is such a fupped language [*], [...]
> 
> to be fair I should have added [*]:
> "outside the set of it's originally intended set of use cases"
> 
> Regards, Frank

One of perl's orgins is as a combination of sed & awk, which explains rather a lot if you ask me.
November 09, 2007
Re: what is the definition of new programming language
0ffh Wrote:

> Bruce Adams wrote:
> > Antti Holvikari Wrote:
> > 
> >> I feel exactly like you. It's hard to explain why. All this syntactic
> >>  sugar just confuses me. Feature after feature, and a 1000 ways to do
> >>  everything.
> >> 
> > I have a preferred strategy for games like chess. Prefer moves that give
> >  you more options over moves that restrict you. 1000 choices is a good 
> > thing. Otherwise, you're shoehorned into writing something in a way that
> >  doesn't always work well.
> 
> It is like cybernetician Heinz von Försters "Imperative":
> "Always act in such a manner as to maximise your future possibilities."
> 
> But note that we are talking abount /semantic/ choices, not /syntactic/!
> 
> Perl is such a fupped language, because it's cluttered with syntactic
> choices that do not only /fail to enrich/ its semantics, but do even
> /obstruct/ elegant and meaningful additions to it.
> 
> Regards, Frank

Let me put that another way. If all you have is a hammer....
everything looks like a nail.
I want the whole tool box.
Next ›   Last »
1 2
Top | Discussion index | About this forum | D home