2 ms·
It's just a description of how the languages were designed. With Objective-C, they started with the "blue collar" language (C) as the base language, and added
by jimbokun 3y ago
It's just a description of how the languages were designed.
With Objective-C, they started with the "blue collar" language (C) as the base language, and added in "white collar" language features (Smalltalk), to achieve a language where you could switch between blue collar and white collar programming without switching languages.
Mojo starts with the white collar language (Python) and adds blue collar language features to it (the Mojo additions that allow you to control the memory layout and execution at a lower level).
That's really all the article is saying.
- Someone 3y agoBut IMO Swift started white-collar, too, with its reference-counting, abort-on-integer-overflow, copy-on-write collections, characters whose size in bytes isn’t fixed, no (or limited, being GCD-only? I don’t remember exactly) multithreading, etc. Yes, it was presented as being a systems language, too, but that convinced very few (and still doesn’t convince many, I think. The language is moving there, but it will be a while before it gets there, if ever) So, why claim Swift more than repeated “Objective-C's mistake of using the component language as the base”?
- mpweiher 3y agoWell, the analogy is incorrect, so yes, it doesn't fit. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯