Impressed

[Alex Rønne Petersen]

On 28-07-2012 10:16, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Jul 2012 09:45:19 +0200
> Alex Rønne Petersen <alex at lycus.org> wrote:
>
>> On 28-07-2012 09:36, Stuart wrote:
>>> On Friday, 27 July 2012 at 21:59:33 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
>>>>
>>>> - Scheme
>>>> - Haskell
>>>> - OCaml
>>>> - F#
>>>> - Erlang
>>>> - Clojure
>>>> - Some C and C++ compilers (gcc, Intel, MSVC in release mode)
>>>> - Most commercial Lisp compilers
>>>
>>> So, as I said, nothing you can write a real program in - except
>>> possibly for F#. The possibility of "some" C compilers supporting
>>> it doesn't mean you can rely on the feature being present.
>>
>> Are you serious........?
>>
>
> I would tend to agree with him, unless you're being overly literal.
>
> Obviously you *can* do real programs in C/C++, hell I've done it (and I
> am doing it, much to my dismay) - but it's notoriously painful. As for
> the rest, yea, sure, stuff *has* been written in them, but regardless,
> most of them still just aren't *realistically* suitable for most
> software development.
>
> It's just like how somebody once write a high-precision Pi calculator
> in MS Batch. They pulled it off, and it works, but that doesn't mean
> Batch is realistically suitable as a numeric processing language.
>
> Writing real software in, for example, Haskell is like calculating
> high-precision Pi in Batch. It can be done, but it takes a masochist.
>

Pointing out the most extreme cases is not really a good way to make a 
point about language usability IMO.

Most of the languages mentioned are very usable for the areas they were 
intended to be used in. Use them in an area they aren't meant for and 
you're pretty much asking for whatever you end up with. Batch sure as 
hell wasn't meant for calculation of *any* kind...

Of course C and C++ are painful. No argument there. But that's due to 
them being designed decades ago. Erlang, OCaml, Clojure, etc are fairly 
sane. Scheme, too, if you (don't (mind (the (parentheses))). :)

(I know, I know, that isn't valid Scheme...)

-- 
Alex Rønne Petersen
alex at lycus.org
http://lycus.org