Re: Announcing new scripting/prototyping language

[Martijn Lievaart <m@remove.this.part.rtij.nl>]

On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 14:02:31 -0500, Jeff Schwab wrote:

>> You may be trying to be funny, but many would agree with this assessment!
> 
> The first line you clipped specifically says "Not trying to be funny."

Obviously there was a certain amount of tongue in cheek, but the point is
real enough.

I find that different languages fit different needs. The choice of
language is often dictated by how much experience one/the team has with
languages. I would never choose ada, simply because I don't know it at all.

Language comparisons can be valid, but there are surprisingly few people
who can say anything solid about that. It quickly degenerates in, well not
necessarely a flame war, but some religion is there always.

That said, seeing an interesting cross of groups, let me make a bold
statement to see if I can sparkle some real discussion, at the risk of
starting another hijad: C++ is an accademic experiment which has thought
us much about computer languages and has grealy influenced how we think
about programming languages today. Unfortunately the experiment has
failed, because the language it produced is so full of subteleties one has
to be an expert to use it effectively. On the other hand, its one of the
best languages around because its multi-paradigm basics make it often a
very good solution for the problem at hand. In particular its support for
generic programming has advanced the state of programming significantly.

To clarify that last remark, there may be languages that do generics
better (I don't know them, but they are bound to exist), but those are not
mainstream.

M4