3 ms·

This is true only for a very narrow set of "new and hot". Lisp and Smalltalk did not "do" the modern, statically typed, inference and category theory heavy lang

This is true only for a very narrow set of "new and hot". Lisp and Smalltalk did not "do" the modern, statically typed, inference and category theory heavy languages that are rapidly growing. Dependent types were not "done" in Lisp/Smalltalk. There are also a lot of "new and hot" things which are not programming language features at all - e.g., the lambda architecture, the rise of bayesian inference, and other such things. Even relational databases - so old that it's easy to forget they were "new and hot" (with good reason).

yodsanklai 11y ago
> statically typed, inference and category theory heavy languages that are rapidly growing. All of this is quite old too. As I said, I learned ML as an undergraduate in 96, 20 years ago. Back then, many "hackers" laughed about such languages. Actually, that's why I think a more foundational CS curriculum is a good thing, as opposed to those that are heavily based on technologies.