Re: Y Store now C++

[Daniel Weinreb <address@hidden>]

Paul Graham wrote:

>  
>
>>why not just take Common Lisp and *fix* it! 
>>    
>>
>
>Do you have any idea how long the future is?  Do you really
>think people in 1000 years want to be constrained by hacks
>that got put into the foundations of Common Lisp because
>a lot of code at Symbolics depended on it in 1988?
>
Just for the record, I agree completely.  Of course, by "fix" Common Lisp
he might have meant taking out said hacks, but that might not be the best
way to get where you want to go.

I think the most important questions to ask when you're talking about 
designing
a new language are the big-picture questions, that is, being very clear 
about
where you want to go and why.  Exactly why a new language?
Exactly where do I expect to go with it, who do I really think will use 
it, how
will I get it to catch on among the targeted community, how will they 
see it,
and so on.

Of course, there's always the other way, which is to just invent the 
language
that you want to invent and then hope you're in the right place at the 
right time
to just happen to get swept to stardom, which is sort of what happened 
with Java.