Re: Avatox 1.0: Trouble with encoding in Windows

["Jeffrey R. Carter" <spam.not.jrcarter@acm.not.spam.org>]

Bj�rn Persson wrote:
> 
> Because it's a bad idea to invent new programming languages all the 
> time. It's not only a waste of time to start your project by designing a 
> language and writing a compiler; the language would also most likely be 
> much worse than some of the existing languages you could have used. 
> Having one well-designed language that can be used in all projects is 
> much better. (Those were the reasons why Ada was created, as I've 
> understood it.) English is � unfortunately � the /lingua franca/ of our 
> time, so using English words for keywords is a better choice than using 
> German words.

Designing a language for a project is sometimes a good idea. I recall a 
report about a class project where there was actual hardware to control 
(I think it was a clothes washing machine). When the students tried to 
control the hardware directly from the general-purpose language, there 
were lots of failures. When they created a problem-specific language, 
with statements such as Fill_Tank (Load_Size), Drain_Tank, 
Start_Agitation, and so on, success was much more common.

Of course, these statements were really calls to a library, and the 
program was really in the general-purpose language.

But I agree that one doesn't want to design and implement a language for 
each project. Just for each language. Ada was designed for the US DOD, 
an English-speaking organization. Do you think a similar project in 
China should have used English reserved words? Or that it would have 
been fine for the Green team to have used French reserved words?

-- 
Jeff Carter
"Run away! Run away!"
Monty Python and the Holy Grail
58