The Next Big Language

[cal]

Jeff Nowakowski Wrote:

> On 10/18/2010 07:52 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> >
> > I definitely think that it would be a plus if D had a fully-compliant, open
> > source compiler, but I don't see its lack as much of a reason not to use the
> > language. The compiler is free and freely available. As long is it does it's
> > job, that seems good enough to me.
> 
> The point is that D is competing with many other "next big languages" 
> that *are* open source. Given the acknowledged benefits, D will 
> rightfully be dinged on that account. That doesn't mean it will 
> necessarily be a dealbreaker, but it is a big factor to take into 
> account, especially considering vendor lock-in. Having all your code 
> stuck in a proprietary language isn't a positive.

A good example of a failed (initially) closed source language is CAL ( http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/node/2045 )

- finally open sourced
- developed by a single vendor
- production ready platform (JVM)
- "familiar" language (similar to Haskell)
- "radical new" visual development tools

The announcement didn't attract (almost) any users. At least there's no evidence.