4 ms·
As mentioned by others, the article does not really tackle the question. But it is an interesting question, and I think it would be great to have a language th
by sega_sai 2y ago
As mentioned by others, the article does not really tackle the question.
But it is an interesting question, and I think it would be great to have a language that you could adjust the safety without major rewrites. I.e. various degrees of strict modes.
At the times of LLMs, I wonder if anyone looked into some sort of sliding-scale transformation of code from safer, to easier to write. (although I am not sure there are good languages that are expressive enough for that).
- evoke4908 2y agoC# is the first thing to come to mind. If you so choose you can more or less inline C and trample all over memory, or you can write very strict, statically typed, safe code.
- HdS84 2y agoC# has unsafe, which extremely powerful. See ravens repo for heavy usage of that. Otherwise python is also a good example of that. First start out in python. Not fast enough? Bring in python, which compiles down to c. Id that's not enough, drop to raw c.
- sega_sai 2y agoI mostly use python, but switching from python to C is IMO too much work. What would be great if within one language, there was an access to much stricter/faster language. I.e. imagine writing a python function that is strictly typed, and does not use any of the python-isms with __methods that would be more verifiable and faster. I guess cython has a bit of that approach, but it's not that compatible with regular python.
- LectronPusher 2y agoYou would likely be interested in Jamie Brandon's work on the Zest language [1] which has planned "lax", "strict", and "kernel" modes for varying levels of performance/safety [1]: https://www.scattered-thoughts.net/writing/zest-dialects-and-metaprogramming/ https://www.scattered-thoughts.net/writing/zest-dialects-and...