[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: what is the problem?
I think this is an interesting exercise, but I would alter
a few of them:
Lisp: Turing Machines are an awkward way to describe computation.
Pascal: Algol doesn't have enough data types.
Scheme: MacLisp is a kludge.
Python: Lisp syntax is scary and CL and Scheme have no libraries.
Java: C++ is a kludge. | Microsoft is going to crush us.
Does anyone have suggestions for Smalltalk, Ruby, Haskell, ML...?
--- "KELLEHER,KEVIN (Non-HP-Roseville,ex1)" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> One could look at each language as an attempt to solve a particular
> I've listed a few below, and probably got some wrong. It would not
> be hard
> make a satirical version as well (see each language as an attempt to
> a particular problem).
> Assembly language is too hard; we need something on a higher level.
> C is not object oriented.
> C/C++ have complicated and dangerous elements, and their executibles
> aren't portable.
> An embedded language should be as small as possible.
> There should be a way to program logical relations.
> We could make a language out of McCarthy's notes.
> Lisp is too big and too complicated. We need something purer.
> Shell scripts/awk/sed are inadequate.
> There should be a language made *for* web programming.
> Perl could be a hell of a lot simpler.
> There are pieces in various languages that need to work together.
> We need some kind of glue that will do that.
> We need an easy/portable way to build GUIs.
> Kevin Kelleher
Do You Yahoo!?
Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of
your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com
or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com