On Saturday, 9 July 2016 at 00:14:34 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 7/8/2016 2:58 PM, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
On Friday, 8 July 2016 at 21:24:04 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 7/7/2016 5:56 PM, deadalnix wrote:
While this very true, it is clear that most D's complexity
doesn't come from
there. D's complexity come for the most part from things
being completely
unprincipled and lack of vision.
All useful computer languages are unprincipled and complex
due to a number of
factors:
I think this is a very dangerous assumption. And also not true.
Feel free to post a counterexample. All you need is one!
Lisp.
What is true is that it is difficult to gain traction if a
language does not
look like a copy of a pre-existing and fairly popular language.
I.e. Reason #2:
"what programmers perceive as logical and intuitive is often
neither logical nor intuitive to a computer"
That's why we have compiler writer and language designers.
