Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 14th Jan 2013 23:15 UTC, submitted by MOS6510
General Development "Programming languages are living phenomena: They're born, the lucky ones that don't die in infancy live sometimes long, fruitful lives, and then inevitably enter a period of decline. Unlike real life, the decline can last many, many years as the presence of large legacy codebases means practiced hands must tend the code for decades. The more popular the language once was, the longer this period of decline will be."
Thread beginning with comment 548794
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
It does NOT mention C#
by tomz on Tue 15th Jan 2013 01:16 UTC
tomz
Member since:
2010-05-06

C# dulls the mind.

Would anyone use Objectionable-C were it not required for Apps for Apple?

Java is cross-platform and consistent, but Android and some web' apps need it.

FORTRAN, nor its more malignant sibling, COBOL, aren't dead yet.

C comes closest to the hardware, a high level assembler. C++ is nonplussed. Scriptography needs simplicity and flexibility, so Python is squeezing out the competitors.

I like the a-b-c's, Awk, bash, C.

Reply Score: 1

RE: It does NOT mention C#
by kargl on Tue 15th Jan 2013 03:05 in reply to "It does NOT mention C#"
kargl Member since:
2007-10-16


FORTRAN, nor its more malignant sibling, COBOL, aren't dead yet.


Fortran is the correct spelling, and it's been the correct spelling since Fortran 90 was ratified some 23 years ago.

BTW, what language were you trying to use when you composed the above sentence?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: It does NOT mention C#
by Hypnos on Tue 15th Jan 2013 03:39 in reply to "It does NOT mention C#"
Hypnos Member since:
2008-11-19

I'm with you on everything except Objective-C -- what's wrong with it in your estimation?

To me it's a winner: all the benefits of C, combined with an object-orientation system with a simple, smalltalk-like syntax and dynamic dispatch.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: It does NOT mention C#
by hhas on Tue 15th Jan 2013 11:59 in reply to "RE: It does NOT mention C#"
hhas Member since:
2006-11-28

I'm with you on everything except Objective-C -- what's wrong with it in your estimation?

To me it's a winner: all the benefits of C, combined with an object-orientation system with a simple, smalltalk-like syntax and dynamic dispatch.


All the drawbacks of C too, unfortunately.

I really wish Apple would take Cyclone (http://cyclone.thelanguage.org/), which is basically C done right, lash it to their existing OO mechanism, and call it Objective-C 3.0. It wouldn't be perfect (e.g. error handling would still suck), but it'd address [Obj]-C's single biggest weakness (safety) and with luck help drive the wider adoption of 'safe C' dialects on other platforms too (something long overdue).

Reply Parent Score: 3