3 ms·

Yeah, your comment is likely the answer. I am just bitter why is all that happening so darned slow. I really hoped that 22 years in my career I would've seen ce

Yeah, your comment is likely the answer. I am just bitter why is all that happening so darned slow. I really hoped that 22 years in my career I would've seen certain problems disappear forever (as in, be solved, formalized, nailed, and never ever discussed again). But alas, nope.

gumby 3y ago
the idea that a byte was 8 bits and not some dynamic length bitstream took at least 20 years, so don't get too excited. So many ideas from Lisp have slowly become mainstream (lambdas, closures, GC, interpreters with dynamic typing, languages both interpreted and compiled...) that I feel like any convergence is far off.
- medo-bear 3y ago
  repl based development, or until people see how cool structural editing really is
  - gumby 3y ago
    Agree on the REPL and exploratory programming! But can’t agree on the structured editing side. I used to do use structured editing (D-Edit on the Interlisp-D machines) and found it annoying, but perhaps that was due to the mandatory mouse use. The structured editing built into emacs is pretty good mainly because it’s an option you can use at any time rather than a single paradigm. Also the only way to use comments in a structure-based system is to extend the syntax of the language, and that is awful IMHO.
    - medo-bear 3y ago
      I use the paredit emacs package (not a builtin). The issues you mention are not present.
tubthumper8 3y ago
Would you not consider "null" to be a problem that has been solved? That's the most obvious example to me, it's a problem that used to be extremely prevalent but is now a completely solved problem. I'm not saying that every existing language has solved it, I mean that it's been shown by modern non-research languages (ex. Rust) that the problem need not exist. Something to be excited about, not bitter
- pdimitar 3y ago
  Oh I do like that for sure, but as you said it's a solved problem in very few languages. But in general, very few such unquestionably good practices are adopted.
  - tubthumper8 3y ago
    > but as you said it's a solved problem in very few languages. That's not what I said. What I said was "I'm not saying that every existing language has solved it". TypeScript, C#, Kotlin, Dart are all examples of popular languages that have solved this problem. Another problem that's currently being solved is the inability to do basic data modeling. In particular, the inability to say "it's A or B". That has been solved in some languages for a long time but is now solved in a number of popular languages too. There really have been quite a number of advancements in the last 22 years, but sometimes it feels like it's just the bare minimum (ex. being able to do basic data modeling, not having everything be surprise null, etc.). It does seem like it takes a long time for good ideas to propagate into the languages that most people are using. The field is young and it's going to take time for things to mature. The next big thing is going to be effect/capability systems (tracking which functions do I/O, access the filesystem, etc.). That might take another 22 years to go mainstream, but that doesn't mean progress isn't being made, it just means that we need more new languages that try new things, evaluate new concepts, and establish techniques to be adopted by other languages.
    - Nevermark 3y ago
      Yes, “solved” can mean multiple things. 1. We have a describable or demonstrable solution Y for problem X. 2. We have a language that uses Y to solve X. 3. We have several languages that use Y to solve X. 4. Most languages use Y to solve X, and popular languages that don’t are anticipated to do so soon so they can. 5. Any sensible language uses Y to solve X. > I really hoped that 22 years in my career I would've seen certain problems disappear forever (as in, be solved, formalized, nailed, and never ever discussed again). But alas, nope. I interpret this comment as referring to “solved number 5”. And I also find it disheartening that that level of solution, for well known problems, seems so rare.

gumby 3y ago

the idea that a byte was 8 bits and not some dynamic length bitstream took at least 20 years, so don't get too excited. So many ideas from Lisp have slowly become mainstream (lambdas, closures, GC, interpreters with dynamic typing, languages both interpreted and compiled...) that I feel like any convergence is far off.

medo-bear 3y ago
repl based development, or until people see how cool structural editing really is
- gumby 3y ago
  Agree on the REPL and exploratory programming! But can’t agree on the structured editing side. I used to do use structured editing (D-Edit on the Interlisp-D machines) and found it annoying, but perhaps that was due to the mandatory mouse use. The structured editing built into emacs is pretty good mainly because it’s an option you can use at any time rather than a single paradigm. Also the only way to use comments in a structure-based system is to extend the syntax of the language, and that is awful IMHO.
  - medo-bear 3y ago
    I use the paredit emacs package (not a builtin). The issues you mention are not present.

tubthumper8 3y ago

Would you not consider "null" to be a problem that has been solved? That's the most obvious example to me, it's a problem that used to be extremely prevalent but is now a completely solved problem. I'm not saying that every existing language has solved it, I mean that it's been shown by modern non-research languages (ex. Rust) that the problem need not exist. Something to be excited about, not bitter

pdimitar 3y ago
Oh I do like that for sure, but as you said it's a solved problem in very few languages. But in general, very few such unquestionably good practices are adopted.
- tubthumper8 3y ago
  > but as you said it's a solved problem in very few languages. That's not what I said. What I said was "I'm not saying that every existing language has solved it". TypeScript, C#, Kotlin, Dart are all examples of popular languages that have solved this problem. Another problem that's currently being solved is the inability to do basic data modeling. In particular, the inability to say "it's A or B". That has been solved in some languages for a long time but is now solved in a number of popular languages too. There really have been quite a number of advancements in the last 22 years, but sometimes it feels like it's just the bare minimum (ex. being able to do basic data modeling, not having everything be surprise null, etc.). It does seem like it takes a long time for good ideas to propagate into the languages that most people are using. The field is young and it's going to take time for things to mature. The next big thing is going to be effect/capability systems (tracking which functions do I/O, access the filesystem, etc.). That might take another 22 years to go mainstream, but that doesn't mean progress isn't being made, it just means that we need more new languages that try new things, evaluate new concepts, and establish techniques to be adopted by other languages.
  - Nevermark 3y ago
    Yes, “solved” can mean multiple things. 1. We have a describable or demonstrable solution Y for problem X. 2. We have a language that uses Y to solve X. 3. We have several languages that use Y to solve X. 4. Most languages use Y to solve X, and popular languages that don’t are anticipated to do so soon so they can. 5. Any sensible language uses Y to solve X. > I really hoped that 22 years in my career I would've seen certain problems disappear forever (as in, be solved, formalized, nailed, and never ever discussed again). But alas, nope. I interpret this comment as referring to “solved number 5”. And I also find it disheartening that that level of solution, for well known problems, seems so rare.