4 ms·
This isn't the kind of article people have questions about - everyone is ready to jump in feet-first with strongly-held opinions! I thought the article was fas
by rm445 5y ago
This isn't the kind of article people have questions about - everyone is ready to jump in feet-first with strongly-held opinions!
I thought the article was fascinating and thought-provoking, I hope all the strongly-worded opinions aren't causing you to regret it.
I was also wondering whether tokenizer rules deserve some flak for making it harder to build identifiers and operators? Why is it more important (in C-like languages) for programmers to write without spaces, than to be able to call a variable ready? or define a +++ operator?
- phkamp 5y agoFar from, if anything the opposite. I mainly write this kind of stuff to make people think about what they would not otherwise have thought about, with the secondary goal getting at chuckle or two along the way. This particular one have been discussed on HN previously and every time the "beause ASCII == keyboard" argument have come up. ...and been slapped down by people from the rest of the world, who have two or even three keystroke sequences to reach [\]{|} etc, because more important national characters, like æøåÆØÅ lives on the "usual" keys. If I managed to get people to think about that, I've done my job. As for C: I think the C lanuage has been mismanaged, why did we need yet a threading API, while we still dont have explicit struct packing, including per struct or per field endianess specification ? The ISO-C Group is incredibly conservative, which is plain wrong: A finite amount of C code have already been written, but there is a potentially infinite amount yet to be written. They should focus on the larger oeuvre.