4 ms·
The criticism that there is no straightforward way to divide programming languages by whether they are compiled or interpreted is correct. But in my eyes, Ouste
by amadeusw 11y ago
The criticism that there is no straightforward way to divide programming languages by whether they are compiled or interpreted is correct. But in my eyes, Ousterhout's point wasn't to divide languages into two camps. He correctly observed that some languages outperform others in system desgin, and others outperform others in supportive roles. There is no single language to rule them all, and that's the beauty of our craft.
- andreasvc 11y ago> in my eyes, Ousterhout's point wasn't to divide languages into two camps. But that is exactly what the word dichotomy implies. If he wasn't dividing languages in camps, there is no reason why there couldn't be a single language to rule them all, and the dichotomy reduces to an observation of the programming languages available at the time, instead of a general, inherent characteristic of programming languages. Also, what is beautiful about not having a single language? A single language is, prima facie, much more elegant.
- amadeusw 11y agoSingle language in one codebase is indeed elegant, and so is interop between languages. The nature of software that leads us to using different languages for various jobs means that developers will keep coming up with new languages, and these languages will have a chance to see the light of day.