4 ms·

Another thing not specifically mentioned in the post is this project will be a good workout for the brand new language (Hare) as well. I remember a post on it n

Another thing not specifically mentioned in the post is this project will be a good workout for the brand new language (Hare) as well. I remember a post on it not too long back on HN that garnered a lot of scathing remarks. Good luck to the authors. However I just want to add a personal comment. In my view, programs will come and go. They can be written and rewritten. But what is really important if we want to ensure free computing for all is not gradually eroded is to work on as many open standards for interoperability as possible to serve as alternatives for proprietary protocols. Also open, community developed languages. However the hardware situation is out of the hands of software developers, yet critically important. Open software and protocols on closed hardware is unsustainable. Lets hope someone like Musk takes the initiative in this area.

userbinator 4y ago
as many open standards for interoperability as possible I don't think that's a good idea. There's the xkcd 927 concern, since there are already long-established standards for a lot of things; and that brings me to what I think we really need, and that is stable standards. The longer a standard has been around unchanged, the more implementations will arise. On the other hand, the browser situation is a great example of what happens when some entity takes control of an "open" standard and then churns it endlessly. I think this is particularly true of programming languages, since they are foundational for everything else.
- nine_k 4y ago
  While stability is very important, openness is still no less important. A number of standards is still patent-encumbered. Back in the day the algorithm to encode a GIF was patented, do you remember that? Do you remember how long Oracle and Google spent in court debating whether it's acceptable to describe and implement public interfaces? A world where you can but may not interoperate is very inhospitable, no matter how stable the closed standards are.
zaik 4y ago
> Lets hope someone like Musk takes the initiative in [open standards for interoperability]. What?
- davidwritesbugs 4y ago
  I'd also just like to say "What?" in fact "WTAF?" Don't invoke the M*k word in a serious discussion.
  - ncmncm 4y ago
    Synonymous with grift.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

userbinator 4y ago

as many open standards for interoperability as possible I don't think that's a good idea. There's the xkcd 927 concern, since there are already long-established standards for a lot of things; and that brings me to what I think we really need, and that is stable standards. The longer a standard has been around unchanged, the more implementations will arise. On the other hand, the browser situation is a great example of what happens when some entity takes control of an "open" standard and then churns it endlessly. I think this is particularly true of programming languages, since they are foundational for everything else.

nine_k 4y ago
While stability is very important, openness is still no less important. A number of standards is still patent-encumbered. Back in the day the algorithm to encode a GIF was patented, do you remember that? Do you remember how long Oracle and Google spent in court debating whether it's acceptable to describe and implement public interfaces? A world where you can but may not interoperate is very inhospitable, no matter how stable the closed standards are.

zaik 4y ago

> Lets hope someone like Musk takes the initiative in [open standards for interoperability]. What?

davidwritesbugs 4y ago
I'd also just like to say "What?" in fact "WTAF?" Don't invoke the M*k word in a serious discussion.
- ncmncm 4y ago
  Synonymous with grift.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]