3 ms·

I think the argument can be summed up as follows: pg - Arc is an exploratory language, meant to appeal to hackers so they can create great things with it. vari

I think the argument can be summed up as follows: pg - Arc is an exploratory language, meant to appeal to hackers so they can create great things with it. various sw devs - But we need Unicode support and W3C compliance How do these requests support the goals of Arc? I think it's funny that people have started complaining about these things (which aren't core to a language) instead of thinking about what kind of cool stuff they can build. Why does a language that furthers the notion of software as art have to conform to existing conventions?

mdemare 19y ago
The cool stuff I want to build happens to involve languages with diacritics. And strings are (or should be) core to programming languages.
- derefr 19y ago
  Just an observation: No one complains that Brainfuck lacks strings, and they have fun playing with that. Software doesn't have to be about building things that are useful in the everyday. I can think of plenty of programs to write that don't involve strings. In fact, I can see one great use for Arc already: a more "hip and modern" language than Scheme that you can convince students to demand they be taught (instead of Blub.) I could envision a version of the SICP written for it by, say, _why.