Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: combjelly who wrote (76161)	6/7/2018 8:32:17 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 365046

I have a book that is interviews with the authors of various languages, which is pretty interesting. It is a Q&A “Why did you do this,” or “Why was this like that and not like something else?” The developer of Objective C actually claimed that it was a better language than c++. This guy was delusional. My point is many of these languages exist imo so someone can put his name on it and create some history for himself, NOT because the language brings anything to the table. Back in the day BASIC served a purpose, now PYTHON finally got hot and it has some great features. I will say that a new paradigm for closure syntax is really needed. There is just no reason for the clunkiness of closures to exist in this day and age. It would also be cool if compilers just automatically took advantage of the available multithreaded capabilities without me having to worry about it. But largely I think new languages showing up today bring little to the table. My 2c.