On Tuesday, 26 July 2022 at 13:31:00 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
> On Tuesday, 26 July 2022 at 13:09:03 UTC, ryuukk_ wrote:
> Throwing C is the worst one can do
Because? There is nothing particularly interesting about C, except very poor typing.
Because there is code still written in C, and rewriting it is not worth it, languages able to play nice with C gets ahead (C++, GO with cgo for example, they were able to kickstart a lot of their projects, and our beloved D too ;))
> Besides, they already did this, you cannot increment pointers for instance.
> Throwing C++ too is not the right way to go
Well, they did this too. They interop with it, but they do it in such a way that they have the option to phase it out in a later version, if my reading between the lines is correct.
That's the thing i mention, being able to consume it to then eat it and get rid of it, most languages are stuck at the consume it part, Go managed to get past it
> > The proper way to do is following Kotlin's success, embracing it to then do your own thing
Kotlin's success is Android, but the JVM environment is a completely different setting.
I guess you could say this is like Objective-C/Swift, but I suspect that Apple will phase out Objective-C eventually.
Kotlin is also phasing out Java/JVM by focusing on Kotlin Native for sharing code between Android/iOS and they are working on their WebAssembly compiler; completly phasing out JVM, notice the pattern ;)
> > The problem is most languages can't get past "embracing C", and they are stuck with it
C is a big bleeding wound in your type system.
> I feel you guys put too much emotions in your analysis, same with Go
In what way? I observe what they do, what they say and how the wider programming community responds… There are no emotions involved.
Maybe emotions wasn't the proper word, skepticism maybe, i don't know, it's an impression i have, Go have merits and i feel we downplay its success a little, we should learn from it
> What they have said is that Google has one team looking at integrating C++ with Rust. Then they have the Carbon team going the other way, from C++ towards something closer to Rust, and this is experimental.
At this stage, this probably is tagged as research and not development, that is my guess. They put a lot of emphasis on experimental, they would not do that if they had been allocated 40+ developers. So I guess they have to prove that this is a project that should move from research to development by showing industry interest or something like that? It isn't obvious that this is an initiative from high level managers, probably the other way around, don't you think?
Exactly, i agree with you