On Thursday, 31 May 2012 at 08:01:14 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 5/30/12 11:47 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2012-05-30 21:10, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I see how these can be annoying, but they're not the result
of us not
designing things. We designed things best we could.
I would say it's not good enough. The whole approach of
designing the
language is wrong.
I understand how frustrating this is. In fact even the way you
consider "good" is not nearly good enough. What we need is
really more formalization of the language design, something
that we're sorely missing. I am sometimes frustrated out of my
mind at the lack of rigor and discipline in the process. On the
other hand, we march with the troops we have.
Andrei
Please no. This is how C++ is designed and we all know how fucked
up that is.
Writing a [rigorous] spec is almost always incorrect since
requirements change and unforeseen things come about. Jacob's
post illustrates this when the spec is written [in TDPL] before
implementing, testing and integrating it.
By making a rigorous spec you exacerbate the problem - it takes
more time to write such a spec thus making the time-frame for
unforeseen changes larger.
