Re: C# should be last plain-text language

[amir@sl.iae.nsk.su (Amir Yantimirov)]

"Larry Barowski" <larrybarATengDOTauburnDOTeduANDthatISall> wrote in message news:<1028f364e6smfca@corp.supernews.com>...

> It seems to me that you don't need any of those, and would be
> better off doing this another way. All the views and editing
> features you want can be created on demand from plain text
> source code, with only a "special comment" syntax, like
> javadoc comments, for structure-specific comments and one
> for "ability to mark declaration as commented out (for debug
> purpose)". You can store information on the current state of
> the views (what is folded, etc.) in a separate database. If
> someone edits the code outside of your tool, they will lose that
> state (no big deal), unless the other editor is compatible with
> your tool. This way developers will be able to work with raw
> source code and other editing tools if they want to (and they will
> want to), but still have the views and features you want. From
> the point of view of someone who uses your tool exclusively,
> there is essentially no difference between a META-language or
> META-comments and using a database. This is the method we
> use to store source code folding information, breakpoint locations,
> etc. in jGRASP.
> 
> -Larry Barowski

You are right, of course. But my intention is what developer 
should not work with raw code at all. The raw code should be 
something alike intermediate assembler code in some compilers.
And then separated database dont't have much benefits.

Generally, I think, existent programming languages are good enough
for solving current programing tasks. Troubles come not from what tasks
are difficult but from what they are numerous. This problem lies 
outside of language domain. And any new improvements as Ada 20XX or
C++ 20XX cannot change this fact.

The lesson of most productive environment I work with (C++ Builder)
is that language is only part of development system. And the most 
effective addition to language are those what helps language better  
integrate with whole system. The cost in case is nonportatibility.

By the way, I looked at http://www.jgrasp.org/
but from PDFs I see the same alphabetical list of files I argue against. :)

Amir Yantimirov
http://www174.pair.com/yamir/programming/