7 ms·

facebook is not written in PHP, it's written in a PHP-like language developed by them which is then transcompiled into C++ and then to binary. > It's the job,

facebook is not written in PHP, it's written in a PHP-like language developed by them which is then transcompiled into C++ and then to binary. > It's the job, not the tools. Again, this is what i disagree with. There really is something objective, independent, and "true" to be said about the utility of various languages in various problem domains. There really is a language which represents the problem space most accurately, for example. It's just defeatism to suppose that "it's all the same, whatever works". Innovation is, of course, the opposite drive. It is at the innovative egdes of programming languages that these debates are had. If you arent part of this innovative edge then it may seem to you that the things youre using are just "market decisions", they are far from it. Every programming language you are using has not been created by the market, it has been shaped by the very debates i am talking about. The market cannot create languages, it does not improve them, the market merely plays out a baggage'd history which language-theorists have to cope with. This is why PHP has changed so much: it is the force of the people who engage in this discussion on the market, to drive it towards "better".

kruhft 14y ago
Facebook was originally written in PHP. It's true there are awesome specific language tools for your specific problems, that when tied together to create a total solution creates an unmaintainable mess that even the creator doesn't understand. Look at the web. I saw Kerrnigan talk about 'little languages' and I fully agree that a specific language designed to solve a problem is the way to go for small problems, like the ones when Unix was designed. Tying all these text based interfaces together is a maintenace nightmare. Maintenenace is a much bigger problem than the actual problems being solved, at least for businesses. Then there's Lisp, which is a mini-language designer's tool kit and the super glue to tie them together all in one integrated package using a well designed, common binding agent. Unfortunately the market has choosen not in it's favour. The market will improve languages and in end game is that they'll all have the same features, and then it comes down to syntax and performance. They'll all be 'better' by today's standards. The problem is at that point is that the better bar will have moved. And the guy that truly innovated during that time won't be found until the next century.

kruhft 14y ago

Facebook was originally written in PHP. It's true there are awesome specific language tools for your specific problems, that when tied together to create a total solution creates an unmaintainable mess that even the creator doesn't understand. Look at the web. I saw Kerrnigan talk about 'little languages' and I fully agree that a specific language designed to solve a problem is the way to go for small problems, like the ones when Unix was designed. Tying all these text based interfaces together is a maintenace nightmare. Maintenenace is a much bigger problem than the actual problems being solved, at least for businesses. Then there's Lisp, which is a mini-language designer's tool kit and the super glue to tie them together all in one integrated package using a well designed, common binding agent. Unfortunately the market has choosen not in it's favour. The market will improve languages and in end game is that they'll all have the same features, and then it comes down to syntax and performance. They'll all be 'better' by today's standards. The problem is at that point is that the better bar will have moved. And the guy that truly innovated during that time won't be found until the next century.