4 ms·

Language ergonomics is more important than being CPU efficient. We have enough CPU performance that we can be a wasteful, LLVM in my opinion is good enough. Cur

Language ergonomics is more important than being CPU efficient. We have enough CPU performance that we can be a wasteful, LLVM in my opinion is good enough. Current industry standard languages are terrible in terms of productivity. Compared to Smalltalk or Lisps we seems to be standing in the same place for last 20 years. What I would like to see is some kind of new take on Smalltalk with async/fibers and inferred static typing . I would like to see language that have hybrid interpreter/compiler modes that allow for decent performance in interpreted mode but to compile into binary when deploying into production.

panic 9y ago
> We have enough CPU performance that we can be a wasteful This argument can't apply to an entire system with all its layers of abstraction. For example, if web browser developers had this attitude, the modern web could never exist -- the platform just wouldn't be fast enough. Every performance gain to things like CPU architectures or programming languages means more opportunities to "waste" the gain at a higher level on things like nice UI or ease of development.