3 ms·
No, one should limit the level of abstraction to the fastest one that is reliable enough to get the job done. There's nothing intrinsic about high abstraction l
by vibrunazo 14y ago
No, one should limit the level of abstraction to the fastest one that is reliable enough to get the job done. There's nothing intrinsic about high abstraction layers that say they must suck for debugging what you need debugged. It just depends on what you need to do with it. If it gets your job done faster and it's reliable enough for your job, then why not? That's why higher abstractions are created in the first place.
In short, you can't instantly rule out this compiler without knowing exactly what you'd want to do with it. And exactly how good it would be at that specific problem.
- eckyptang 14y agoYes no limits to abstractions always works perfectly.. Check out this stack trace: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/os-ecspy1/stack-trace-view.gif http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/os-ecspy1/sta... Now imagine that across three different languages.
- erik-kallen 14y agoJava has been said to be a DSL to convert XML configuration into stack traces. But what does this have to do with compiling C# to Javascript?
- eckyptang 14y agoThe abstraction is too deep. The stack trace above is an example of what too deep abstractions do to those who have to use them.