5 ms·
Simplicity and Survival
- tromp 4y agoThis makes me feel good about the survival odds of binary lambda calculus [1] [1] https://www.ioccc.org/2012/tromp/hint.html https://www.ioccc.org/2012/tromp/hint.html
- koeng 4y agoThis is one reason I really like lua - it is a simple enough language that it can stand the test of time, while being easy enough to learn by anyone, and still being stupid fast with luajit. A great little language, especially when combined with teal.
- neojebfkekeej 4y agoHow does PHP / Ruby fare?
- legulere 4y agoPHP has Facebook invested in heavily.
- chubot 4y agoThere are some true observations here, but the real problem is that simple languages are often not very productive / useful, and languages become more complex when people use them (demanding features) Otherwise SML would be fine, and there's no need for OCaml Otherwise Scheme would be fine, and there's no need for Common Lisp Otherwise C would be fine, and there's no need for C++ or Rust (or Austral or whatever) ---- I think a better way of framing it is how much useful functionality you can put in a language while still feeling "simple", or at least familiar. There is only limited syntactic space, and features tend to interact with combinatorial explosions, so more features definitely weigh down a language. ---- Another strategy is the "simple core" language, leaving most stuff to libraries. But you have to only look at JS to see how that complexity pops up elsewhere often in greater form (in the package manager) Likewise look at C++ 20 coroutines or just STL in general ... there is a limited amount in the core, and a bunch of hooks for the user, but it is awfully complex as a whole.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- zh3 4y agoI guess C would be hard-lower-left on the final table; makes me think what are the candidates for upper-right.