Linked by snydeq on Sun 11th Dec 2011 01:35 UTC
General Development Fatal Exception's Neil McAllister writes in favor of new programming languages given the difficulty of upgrading existing, popular languages. 'Whenever a new programming language is announced, a certain segment of the developer population always rolls its eyes and groans that we have quite enough to choose from already,' McAllister writes. 'But once a language reaches a certain tipping point of popularity, overhauling it to include support for new features, paradigms, and patterns is easier said than done.' PHP 6, Perl 6, Python 3, ECMAScript 4 -- 'the lesson from all of these examples is clear: Programming languages move slowly, and the more popular a language is, the slower it moves. It is far, far easier to create a new language from whole cloth than it is to convince the existing user base of a popular language to accept radical changes.'
Permalink for comment 499847
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: "Better" vs. Better
by ilovebeer on Sun 11th Dec 2011 17:54 UTC in reply to "RE: "Better" vs. Better"
ilovebeer
Member since:
2011-08-08

Totally agree, You should never do a rewrite on a piece of software because you instantly lose years worth of effort.

If all those years of effort took the software in the wrong direction and wound up crippling it more than helping it for future expansion, then yes, a complete rewrite is certainly the better option.

There's one constant that you should always consider as much as possible -- progression. If you want your language to survive the test of time, it not only needs to be good, it needs to be expandable/extendable. That is a key element in it's basic design. If you ignore it, you will pay the price later.

Reply Parent Score: 1