Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 28th Jul 2013 14:06 UTC
General Development "There is a reason I use 'old' languages like J or Lush. It's not a retro affectation; I save that for my suits. These languages are designed better than modern ones. There is some survivor bias here; nobody slings PL/1 or Cobol willingly, but modern language and package designers don't seem to learn much from the masters. Modern code monkeys don't even recognize mastery; mastery is measured in dollars or number of users, which is a poor substitute for distinguishing between what is good and what is dumb. Lady Gaga made more money than Beethoven, but, like, so what?" This isn't just a thing among programmers. The entire industry is obsessed with user numbers, number of applications, and other crap that is meaningless when you consider programming to be art. When I post a new item about some small hobby operating system, the comments will be filled with negativity because it's no Windows or iOS, whereas only ten years ago, we'd have lively discussions about the implementation details. And then people wonder why that scene has died out.
Thread beginning with comment 568198
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Oh goody
by Alfman on Sun 28th Jul 2013 19:49 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Oh goody"
Alfman
Member since:
2011-01-28

Kroc,

That's a lengthy post, but you don't really define what "purism" means in the context of what you are talking about.

I assume that your are talking about OOP? If so, I agree it can sometimes be overdone, but realistically most PHP code isn't OOP anyways so the criticism seems a little hypothetical.

"*sigh* But alas. Purism is best and I have to sit by and watch JavaScript get groomed and abused by these same people who want to make JavaScript a Real Programming Language and turn it into something completely inaccessible to the masses."

Off the top of my head I cannot think of any negative changes and it was always OOP based. Can you give examples to clarify what you mean? Try/catch was very good to add, same with regex, and ajax support.

My wishlist for JS: I really do wish they'd add namespaces. For security it would also be extremely valuable to have code domains (sandboxes) to allow webmasters to add security barriers between scripts.

It's pretty bad that webmasters are including 3rd party scripts (say for displaying ads, recording page hits, etc) where they implicitly share full control over the user's browser because the language doesn't have a construct for separating script domains.

Granted domains are not available in most languages, but I've used it in .net to allow 3rd party plugins to run isolated from the main code. An example might be a public game server where you want users to be able to upload plugins for their character but you still want their code to be contained in separate execution sandbox for both stability and security reasons.

Edited 2013-07-28 19:53 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Oh goody
by Kroc on Sun 28th Jul 2013 22:31 in reply to "RE[3]: Oh goody"
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

Apologies for waxing poetical. "Purism" in simplest terms is best described as "being more meta". The more meta a language it is, the "purer" it is perceived -- that is, more abstract and layered. Templates, Generics, Factories, Overloading, Abstract/Polymorphic classes and so on. Each is a useful feature, but a "pure" language is one that begins with very high-level concepts that must be understood before one can begin to understand the code. The code becomes opaque and incomprehensible to anybody who does not have the "knowledge" of these high-level meta concepts about how the code is organised, structured and designed. Anybody who does not understand this inside-knowledge is looked down upon and nobody is willing to explain it to you.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[5]: Oh goody
by lucas_maximus on Sun 28th Jul 2013 22:52 in reply to "RE[4]: Oh goody"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

The code becomes opaque and incomprehensible to anybody who does not have the "knowledge" of these high-level meta concepts about how the code is organised, structured and designed. Anybody who does not understand this inside-knowledge is looked down upon and nobody is willing to explain it to you.


What a load of bollox. Everyone of those concepts you listed is well documented and has hundreds of examples online.

It not like you suddenly can't write simple web scripts in either PHP or JavaScript. Both languages have been been given more features to allow those that need them to use them.

Edited 2013-07-28 22:52 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1