On Tuesday, 29 May 2018 at 03:56:05 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
On Tuesday, 29 May 2018 at 01:46:47 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
A cautionary tale we should all keep in mind.
http://open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG21/docs/papers/2018/p0977r0.pdf
https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/8mq10v/bjarne_stroustroup_remeber_the_vasa_critique_of/
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17172057
It seems C++ is following the road of PL/I, which is growing
language way beyond the point anyone can understand or
implement all of it.
This is ultimately a matter of 'architecture', rather than being
a problem of a 'growing langauge'.
A good architecture could allow growth/complexity to arise in a
manageable way.
When you have languages that are so low level, you simply cannot
create good architecture, beyone a certain point (either from the
users point of view, or the implementers).
What we need, is better architecture in langauge design.
This, ultimately, means we need to move away from the von Neumann
machine, because that is really what's holding us back, from
developing good architecture (for managing the inevitable
complexity that arises from change).
Nature shows us the way - we just don't bother to look.
