3 ms·
This might be a preference that isn’t universally shared, but I really do find shorter programs easier to read. I don’t mean code-golf style short, but language
by todd8 8y ago
This might be a preference that isn’t universally shared, but I really do find shorter programs easier to read. I don’t mean code-golf style short, but languages that don’t need a lot of boilerplate or ceremony. I’ve frequently used Python on personal projects for over 20 years because of its expressiveness.
Of course, correctness trumps almost everything in programming. Rust seems like a really nicely balanced programming language that can replace C++ and C and provide additional protection against some kinds of common errors made by programmers. So it’s definitely on my list of languages to try next for a project.
- coldtea 8y ago>This might be a preference that isn’t universally shared, but I really do find shorter programs easier to read. Even so, 1300 vs 1000, or 1.3x is not really in the "so much more as to be more difficult to read" category. In fact it can be in the "better worded and easier to read category" (e.g. a monolithic stream of code without functions and comments vs one with).
- todd8 8y agoYou’re right. Ada has come up in this thread and there was a time when I was excited about Ada (I actually worked in a group that was competing in the early Strawman—Ironman proposals that led to the design of Ada), but Ada really is too verbose for my taste. Rust might end up being just right, not too concise, like Haskell or APL, and not too verbose, like Java or Ada; it could be a Goldilocks language.