The Next Big Language

[Paulo Pinto]

Yes, here is a summary of programming languages killer features.

C - The official language to develop for Unix
C++ - Provided a path for OOP programming to C developers, created at the
        same company that "owned" Unix
Pascal - Provided a very good way to learn structured programming
Perl - Was a the right place for mixing shell scripting and text 
manipulation
Python - Started as a better Perl, Zope helped it get known, now used in HPC 
to script applications
Javascript - If it wasn't for the browser it wouldn't be used at all
Ruby - Without Rails, people still wouln't care about it, most likely
Groovy - Provided a Ruby like programming environment for programmers in the 
Java world
Objective-C - The official way to develop for iPhone/iPad (for sure it 
counts more than just OSX)
Java - Oracle(Sun) and IBM give huge support to it. Plus the way it is used 
in universities around the world
C# - Microsoft is making it the official .Net systems language
Scala - Seems to be the next big language in the JVM
Haskell, F# - Multicore is making functional programming more mainstream. 
Plus Microsoft money.

There are probably more examples, that I have forgotten.

So the question is, what could the D killer feature be?

--
Paulo




"so" <so at so.do> wrote in message news:op.vkrq8u127dtt59 at so-pc...
> Thank you,
>
> First point is a good one and explains Go's popularity and it is hard not 
> to agree that D fails on that one, no can do.
> But is the second one applies to languages? I mean you can sell an OS with 
> a killer application or a computer but a programming language?
>
> The set of features a language have is the most important point imo, but 
> the real pain is, how do you think you are going to explain this to 
> programming community?
>
> One thing i find very strange about programmer community, you would 
> normally expect them to be above normal, expect them to be rational, but 
> they are no better, most of them are just bunch of language warriors. We 
> have some of them in this board too and Reddit is full of them, you can't 
> reason with them.
>
> On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 13:52:13 +0300, Paulo Pinto <pjmlp at progtools.org> 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> because there are only two ways languages get maintstream:
>>
>> - lots of PR and money invested into them building a community
>> - there is a "killer application/set of features" that builts a community
>> around the language
>>
>> Usually closed source languages get maintream due to the first bullet 
>> point
>> and the
>> languages that got mainstream due to the last point are all open source.
>>
>> For my understanding D fails point one, which bring us to the second 
>> point,
>> hence the
>> complaing about the open source compiler.
>>
>> --
>> Paulo
>>
>> "so" <so at so.do> wrote in message news:op.vkriu8m07dtt59 at so-pc...
>>> Forgive my ignorance but whenever i read a D review on that reddit 
>>> thing,
>>> one always brings up this open source complier thing.
>>>
>>> My question is how many D like languages came up with an open source
>>> compiler? Why do people keep using that argument again and again?
>>>
>>> On Sun, 17 Oct 2010 18:18:26 +0300, Andrei Alexandrescu
>>> <SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Discusses a few languages including D:
>>>> http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/dsdd6/the_next_big_language_2010_edition/
>>>>
>>>> Andrei
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
>>
>>
>
>
> -- 
> Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/