3 ms·
I think OP means systems languages that are memory safe, without garbage collection and sandboxing.
by chrisco255 3y ago
I think OP means systems languages that are memory safe, without garbage collection and sandboxing.
- marcosdumay 3y agoHum, nothing on the context implies the argument is about system languages. But yeah, I can imagine somebody so focused on them that they ignore the need to add that bit of context. The issue with system languages is that all the evidence points towards there not being space for a lot of them. So we only get one with whatever properties are most desirable; and it dries the landscape from opportunities for any other with similar features. Thus, no, unless people decide there's some large new problem worth solving on them, we are not getting more memory-safe mainstream system languages. (But it's funny that you say sandboxing, because IMO that, probably with explicit effects is a nice thing to solve if you are trying to create the next generation system language.)