3 ms·

So does that mean you feel programming language design peaked in 1972?

• bluGill 3y ago
  No. However I think most "modern" languages make a big mistake because they don't address interoperability. Rust is great if you only write in rust, but if you have millions of lines of C++ it is really hard to fix a simple one line of code bug in rust. Rust cannot talk C++ - it can at least talk C but you lose the advantages of rust. Now imagine you have C++, rust, go, and ada teams fighting about which is best - they have to drop down to 1972 C to work with each other. (note that I carefully excluded D since D does have some C++ interoperability) I do not know the best way for any modern language to take to any other modern language - but 1972 C is a big negative to them all.
  • pjmlp 3y ago
    Only on Linux and regular UNIX systems. On other systems we have XPC, COM, AIDL, TIMI, MSIL.
    • bluGill 3y ago
      Trade offs - I'm not familiar with all of those, but the ones I do know of are trading something for that flexibility - generally performance and power consumption - two things that we should not be willing to trade off. You can get similar things from UNIX as well, though it isn't the default and so you need extra effort to use them. That said I fully accept your correction. (even though it doesn't apply in my world)