3 ms·
> we should be much more ambitious for the Next Generation of programmers There's a lot of value in using simpler (but modern) languages in production instead
by geoka9 8y ago
> we should be much more ambitious for the Next Generation of programmers
There's a lot of value in using simpler (but modern) languages in production instead of something choke-full of paradigms. Creators of popular languages seem to more or less agree with that (e.g. Java -> Kotlin, C++ -> Golang, Scala -> Dotty/Scala3).
- tiuPapa 8y agoI guess C++ -> Golang is debatable, maybe Python -> Golang?
- geoka9 8y agoIf I remember correctly, one of the motivators for Go was the desire to avoid having to use C++ by the original authors. That said, I agree that Pyhon -> Golang fits in that trend too.
- pjmlp 8y agoTrue, but they dumbed Go so much down that they hardly attracted anyone used to write modern code in C++. https://commandcenter.blogspot.com/2012/06/less-is-exponentially-more.html https://commandcenter.blogspot.com/2012/06/less-is-exponenti...
- erik_seaberg 8y agoTo be fair, Googlers can't write modern C++ because they have a critical mass of legacy code that has never been exception-safe. Avoiding RAII kneecaps the whole language badly.
- repolfx 8y agoGoogle doesn't avoid RAII, they just avoid exceptions.
- erik_seaberg 8y agoThe beauty of RAII is that every resource is tied to the lifetime of an object, and every object is always in a usable state. Having to call extra open/close methods and check error codes breaks these invariants, and leads to objects with bad fidelity to the normal copy and move semantics the language is built on.
- valw 8y agoTotally agree - and "new paradigms" isn't the same thing as "choke-full of paradigms". What's more, there's as much value in taking things away than in adding them (how about classes for example?)