3 ms·

I don't get the following requirement: Great Windows support That doesn't have anything to do with the programming language. That's all about the librarie

I don't get the following requirement: Great Windows support That doesn't have anything to do with the programming language. That's all about the libraries and toolchains that the language ships with. Sure, when I evaluate a language, I also take into account the maturity of the libraries and tools that the language includes. But I don't think lack of library support (especially for a single platform) should be a criterion in judging the design of the language.

andrewflnr 13y ago
I think his title is more to blame than the content. He's not really just talking about the design, he's talking about the whole package, about doing actual work and getting money for it. He mentions other environmental concerns in the first paragraph as things that keep him in C++. Design just happens to be the most noticeable factor.
michaelochurch 13y ago
He works on videogames, so Windows is non-negotiable. I had the same reaction, but given that his code has to run on other peoples' desktops, it makes sense.
hnriot 13y ago
Yeah, this point is just plain dumb. And although he says windows is an extremely popular o/s, it might be, in general, but not for software engineering. A unix like environment is far superior for software dev, unless you stay in visual studio all day (or eclipse) The other points are largely flame bait too. A competent developer can manage just fine in java, python, c++ or a host of other languages that fail his tests. A classic case or the bad worker who blames his tools. My response to this kind of blog post is grow up, deal with the reality of the languages that are in every day use and stop whining about things like null pointers!
- evincarofautumn 13y ago
  That’s not what the post is about. He’s saying that if you’re designing a new language, you should meet these criteria because they are deficiencies in existing languages. We live with the flaws of old tools because they have other, more important value to us—a new language has no value without adoption, so it had better improve on its predecessors in order to convince people to adopt it.

andrewflnr 13y ago

I think his title is more to blame than the content. He's not really just talking about the design, he's talking about the whole package, about doing actual work and getting money for it. He mentions other environmental concerns in the first paragraph as things that keep him in C++. Design just happens to be the most noticeable factor.

michaelochurch 13y ago

He works on videogames, so Windows is non-negotiable. I had the same reaction, but given that his code has to run on other peoples' desktops, it makes sense.

hnriot 13y ago

Yeah, this point is just plain dumb. And although he says windows is an extremely popular o/s, it might be, in general, but not for software engineering. A unix like environment is far superior for software dev, unless you stay in visual studio all day (or eclipse) The other points are largely flame bait too. A competent developer can manage just fine in java, python, c++ or a host of other languages that fail his tests. A classic case or the bad worker who blames his tools. My response to this kind of blog post is grow up, deal with the reality of the languages that are in every day use and stop whining about things like null pointers!

evincarofautumn 13y ago
That’s not what the post is about. He’s saying that if you’re designing a new language, you should meet these criteria because they are deficiencies in existing languages. We live with the flaws of old tools because they have other, more important value to us—a new language has no value without adoption, so it had better improve on its predecessors in order to convince people to adopt it.