[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: lightweight languages
On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, Dan Weinreb wrote:
> You're presenting this from the point of view of a writer of code,
> whereas I am taking the point of view of a reader of code. If Scheme
> programmers typically make heavy use of CPS and call/cc stuff, perhaps
> because that's how they were taught to program, then as a reader I
> don't have the choice you're talking about.
This is the difference I was describing:
lightweight code is optimized for writing
heavyweight code is optimized for reading
Complex features, like CPS, are good in lightweight languages
because, if you know how to use them, they are really powerful, and
do what you want really efficiently.
Complex features are bad in heavyweight languages because the reader may
not have as much programming expertise or knowledge of the particular
programming language as the writer, and may not understand or know how to
use the particular feature.
The more work they have to do so understand your code, the less
heavyweight your code is.
S. Alexander Jacobson i2x Media
1-917-783-0889 voice 1-212-697-1427 fax