3 ms·
Failed at being a hundred year language. Arc programs are shorter, but only by a constant factor due to small syntax enhancements. It doesn't provide interestin
by jules 18y ago
Failed at being a hundred year language. Arc programs are shorter, but only by a constant factor due to small syntax enhancements. It doesn't provide interesting new abstractions like Lisp did.
- comatose_kid 18y agoTo make the statement that arc has failed with credibility, you'd need the following: 1. A completed version of arc 2. 100 years since 1.
- echair 18y agoLike which Lisp did?
- jules 18y agothe original