3 ms·
on one hand, yes, I support their right to do whatever they want with their product. on the other hand, as a user I am not willing to invest any time or attenti
by zem 9y ago
on one hand, yes, I support their right to do whatever they want with their product. on the other hand, as a user I am not willing to invest any time or attention in a closed source language.
also, having seen that philosophy essentially kill qi/shen, I am sceptical of it as a general approach. might work for some niches like game dev.
- RandomBK 9y agoIndeed. Programming languages are a buyer's market. Sure, you can feel free to do whatever you want with your own language - just don't expect people to take it seriously.
- TurboHaskal 9y agoWhat killed Qi/Shen? Didn't M. Tarver end up open sourcing it with a BSD like license to end up with nobody actually giving a f?
- zem 9y agoyes, but there seems to be a certain window of opportunity for new language where they have enough mindshare for lots of early adopters to check them out, and if there are any barriers to adoption at that point the crowd tends to move on to the next new thing. sadly, fixing things later doesn't seem to work, though I wish it would. I can immediately think of shen, rebol and D as languages that have not done nearly as well as one might expect based purely on what they offered to PL enthusiasts, and I am sure there are lots more.
- mncharity 9y ago> lots more Poplog - a hydra of Common Lisp, Standard ML, Prolog, and POP-11. Late 1980's, early 1990's, it seemed like it could change the world. With dreams of riches, it was kept closed source and commercial. It made a few million... and is dead and forgotten. Gotta wonder what the world might be like now, if they'd chosen glory over riches.