3 ms·

> you cannot reduce the complexity of a programming language by expanding the size of the language with greater features. This sounds like a contradiction (May

> you cannot reduce the complexity of a programming language by expanding the size of the language with greater features. This sounds like a contradiction (Maybe I'm missing something, but) I'm not sure why this should sound at all like a contradiction – how could increasing a language's size/features reduce its complexity?! Maybe you meant "the complexity of programs in a language"?

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
open-source-ux 6y ago
It's often developers who are pushing for new features in a programming language. They think the addition of a feature will make it easier (or more convenient) to code the problem they face. Possibly reduce the lines of code. That is the contradiction: does the addition of features makes the language more complex? Or do the features help simplify the code? Different answers for different languages? It will be interesting to see the trajectory of new languages like Nim, Julia and Rust. These are medium-sized languages and Rust in particular is already considered complex by some programmers. Only time will show how much they grow in language features and complexity.
- yesenadam 6y ago
  Thanks. It still feels to me like you're talking about the complexity of programs in the language, not the complexity of the language.
  - AnimalMuppet 6y ago
    If the language makes writing the language (compiler, libraries, tooling, or whatever) easier, at the expense of making it harder to write programs in the language, then you're going to have a nice, easy-to-implement language that nobody will actually use to write programs. And what's the point of that?
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
blippage 6y ago
Herb Sutter, a C++ expert, said that is possible (but it's not the general case) to simplify C++ by adding features. IIRC, on such feature is the "spaceship" operator <=>, which simplifies writing comparisons. You do need to think carefully about how to add features, though.
- yesenadam 6y ago
  Thanks. This does just seem to be a different way of talking about things! It seemed strange at first. What you talk about also seems to make the language more complex, and programs simpler. Seems like you and open-source-ux don't see it/talk about it that way though. By "the language", I mean every part of it, (I thought that's what everyone means!) and you two seem to mean, only the parts of a language used in the programs you write.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

open-source-ux 6y ago

It's often developers who are pushing for new features in a programming language. They think the addition of a feature will make it easier (or more convenient) to code the problem they face. Possibly reduce the lines of code. That is the contradiction: does the addition of features makes the language more complex? Or do the features help simplify the code? Different answers for different languages? It will be interesting to see the trajectory of new languages like Nim, Julia and Rust. These are medium-sized languages and Rust in particular is already considered complex by some programmers. Only time will show how much they grow in language features and complexity.

yesenadam 6y ago
Thanks. It still feels to me like you're talking about the complexity of programs in the language, not the complexity of the language.
- AnimalMuppet 6y ago
  If the language makes writing the language (compiler, libraries, tooling, or whatever) easier, at the expense of making it harder to write programs in the language, then you're going to have a nice, easy-to-implement language that nobody will actually use to write programs. And what's the point of that?
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]

blippage 6y ago

Herb Sutter, a C++ expert, said that is possible (but it's not the general case) to simplify C++ by adding features. IIRC, on such feature is the "spaceship" operator <=>, which simplifies writing comparisons. You do need to think carefully about how to add features, though.

yesenadam 6y ago
Thanks. This does just seem to be a different way of talking about things! It seemed strange at first. What you talk about also seems to make the language more complex, and programs simpler. Seems like you and open-source-ux don't see it/talk about it that way though. By "the language", I mean every part of it, (I thought that's what everyone means!) and you two seem to mean, only the parts of a language used in the programs you write.