3 ms·

I don't agree with one the points and I think at least one important is omitted. You don't need to know any scripting language and while Ruby, Python etc is pop

I don't agree with one the points and I think at least one important is omitted. You don't need to know any scripting language and while Ruby, Python etc is popular in the LAMP camp .Net (and possibly Java) and probably a dussin other compiled languages are holding their own. There's nothing intrinsically elegant or better with scripting languages. One major trend that's omitted is the coming important of concurrent/multicore programming. It has become clear for many that computers aren't getting that much faster but they're getting more and more core's. To be be able to utilize that power you need to start code from the ground up to take advantage of multithreading. On the .Net side Microsoft seems very aware of this and has rolled out a number of new techologies and tool support, things like Parallel.net, PLINQ, Reactive Framework and most recently Async. F# is by nature of being a functional language very suited for parallel processing. No doubt other frameworks and languages will soon follow.

steveklabnik 16y ago
> There's nothing intrinsically elegant or better with scripting languages. I would argue that dyanmically typed languages (or static languages with Hindley-Milner) are intrinsically more elegant than statically typed, since you don't have the type information cluttering up your code. That says nothing about 'better,' of course. But certainly more elegant.
jmulho 16y ago
Try a scripting language; you might change your mind. There is a reason why they are so popular. It doesn't take too long to see why once you try. Things that used to take forever to get working just seem to work on the first or second try. Am I getting smarter? Maybe, but more likely the language really is intrinsically better (I tried Python).
jmulho 16y ago
Good point on concurrent programming. Programs aren't going to get twice as fast every 18 months on their own anymore. We are going to have to learn to make use of multiple cores. Google's go language is an obvious contender.

steveklabnik 16y ago

> There's nothing intrinsically elegant or better with scripting languages. I would argue that dyanmically typed languages (or static languages with Hindley-Milner) are intrinsically more elegant than statically typed, since you don't have the type information cluttering up your code. That says nothing about 'better,' of course. But certainly more elegant.

jmulho 16y ago

Try a scripting language; you might change your mind. There is a reason why they are so popular. It doesn't take too long to see why once you try. Things that used to take forever to get working just seem to work on the first or second try. Am I getting smarter? Maybe, but more likely the language really is intrinsically better (I tried Python).

jmulho 16y ago

Good point on concurrent programming. Programs aren't going to get twice as fast every 18 months on their own anymore. We are going to have to learn to make use of multiple cores. Google's go language is an obvious contender.