Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

Dart Programming Language

<< < (5/6) > >>

Josh:
Renegade, could you edit your post to put that "small list" inside a code box? :)
-Josh (October 19, 2011, 09:09 PM)
--- End quote ---

Choices, choices... :)


-Renegade (October 19, 2011, 09:29 PM)
--- End quote ---

Thanks much :)

Renegade:
Thanks much :)
-Josh (October 19, 2011, 09:33 PM)
--- End quote ---

It is a stupidly long list. You'd think that there'd be at least 1 language that could, just maybe possibly perhaps do the job.

Well, I suppose that as soon as someone invents the wheel, it's time to line up to reinvent it...

cranioscopical:
The user interface is pretty interesting too.
-40hz (October 12, 2011, 07:53 AM)
--- End quote ---
Especially when you move over to the other's IDE  ;)

Deozaan:
Like WhyTF would you create a *new* language? There are lots already.

[. . .]

Any attempt to create a new language is pure idiocy. We do not need more languages. We have enough of them.-Renegade (October 11, 2011, 11:47 AM)
--- End quote ---

Should we stop making new models of cars because we have enough of them already? Should we stop writing new books because every story has already been told? Should we stop making new music because every note has already been played?

Admittedly the book and music examples aren't very good arguments, but the point is that I'm all for allowing people to innovate and see if they can come up with something better. Nobody is forcing you to learn a new language (except, I suppose, potentially employers or potential clients) but that would only happen if the new language actually was good enough to be worthwhile. Not necessarily better, but worthwhile at least.

But I don't think there's a problem with having a wide variety of options at our fingertips. Especially the option to decide you can do something better and invent your own programming language. It takes many failed experiments to make one great success.

Renegade:
Like WhyTF would you create a *new* language? There are lots already.

[. . .]

Any attempt to create a new language is pure idiocy. We do not need more languages. We have enough of them.-Renegade (October 11, 2011, 11:47 AM)
--- End quote ---

Should we stop making new models of cars because we have enough of them already? Should we stop writing new books because every story has already been told? Should we stop making new music because every note has already been played?

Admittedly the book and music examples aren't very good arguments, but the point is that I'm all for allowing people to innovate and see if they can come up with something better. Nobody is forcing you to learn a new language (except, I suppose, potentially employers or potential clients) but that would only happen if the new language actually was good enough to be worthwhile. Not necessarily better, but worthwhile at least.

But I don't think there's a problem with having a wide variety of options at our fingertips. Especially the option to decide you can do something better and invent your own programming language. It takes many failed experiments to make one great success.
-Deozaan (October 20, 2011, 01:54 PM)
--- End quote ---

True enough. Choice can be good. But then we get into the area where we have too many choices, and the sheer volume of choices becomes a source of stress rather than a solution to a problem.

But it still seems to me that instead of fragmenting efforts in attempts to build everything over again, it would be better to focus on improving what exists. It's not like the languages are like disposable lighters that once done, are done. They're more like zippos. Perhaps some better fuel. Perhaps a better wick. Perhaps an electronic "flint".

It would be much more productive for people to instead of learn from scratch, to pick up where some language, say Python, leaves off and start up with a fork of Python that features some additional gizmos that address specific problem in some domain. That then gives people back some of that time that they would have spent on a learning curve.

Why not put those efforts to innovate purely into the innovation and abandon the "grunt work" that has gone before?

i.e. It's better to stand on the shoulders of giants, than to try to grow that high, then higher.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page