3 ms·
No, syntax is not merely bikeshedding, but endless discussions about it can certainly turn into that. I don't know what qualifies as "mainstream", but anything
by skrishnamurthi 8y ago
No, syntax is not merely bikeshedding, but endless discussions about it can certainly turn into that. I don't know what qualifies as "mainstream", but anything that sprang from the head of Milner, you can be sure, put semantics first. As, for that matter, did work from Dijkstra, Hoare, etc. Lots of good semantics work out there that has often indirectly had a huge influence on the mainstream.
- User23 8y agoI was engaging in a little hyperbole. Dijkstra has some compelling monographs on the value of choosing good syntax, it's true. You understood my meaning though as referring to the standard substandard discussion of the subject. Yeah Dijkstra, Hoare, Knuth, Lamport, and friends are basically my heroes. Algol 60 is fine work. It has a very readable syntax. It's easy to see why it's even now used for scholarly publication. Hadn't heard of Milner though, any suggested reading?
- skrishnamurthi 8y agoI have to assume you're trolling me at this point, but just in case not: https://amturing.acm.org/award_winners/milner_1569367.cfm https://amturing.acm.org/award_winners/milner_1569367.cfm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robin_Milner https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robin_Milner ML did not spring fully-formed from the heads of the creators of OCaml…
- User23 8y agoI meant a work or works by Milner