[OT] Why software ends up complex

[Ola Fosheim Grøstad]

On Friday, 18 December 2020 at 16:39:39 UTC, Bruce Carneal wrote:
> Yes.  What matters is simplicity as accurately perceived by the 
> reader of the language and, to a lesser extent, simplicity as 
> perceived by the compiler writers.
>
> Language augmentations, unarguably, make a language 
> implementation more complex but they can also make the language 
> simpler to use correctly.

Indeed. Like, any aspect of the type checker that doesn't affect 
code gen could be defined to be outside the core language (e.g. a 
borrow checker, sanitization). And as we start to see with more 
and more advanced IDEs, that aspect of the language does not have 
to be embedded in the compiler, but yet the programmer may 
perceive that the feedback they get from the IDE does contribute 
to the experienced language (as they see it). The boundary is not 
as clear as it once was.