What Makes A Programming Language Good

[Vladimir Panteleev]

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 13:27:56 +0200, bearophile <bearophileHUGS at lycos.com>  
wrote:

> Vladimir Panteleev:
>
>> Forcing a code repository is bad.
>
> In this case I was not suggesting to force things :-) But having a place  
> to find reliable modules is very good.
>
>
>> This is not practical.
>
> It works in Python, Ruby and often in Perl too, so I don't agree.

I think we have a misunderstanding, then? Who ensures that the modules  
"just work"? If someone breaks something, are they thrown out of The Holy  
Repository?

>> I assume you mean naming conventions and not actual code style  
>> (indentation etc.)
>
> I meant that D code written by different people is better looking  
> similar, where possible. C/C++ programmers have too much freedom where  
> freedom is not necessary. Reducing some of such useless freedom helps  
> improve the code ecosystem.

It also demotivates and alienates programmers.

> - Currently D packages are not working well yet, there are bug reports  
> on this.
> - Something higher level than packages is useful when you build very  
> large systems.
> - Module system theory from ML-like languages shows many years old ideas  
> that otherwise will need to be painfully re-invented half-broken by D  
> language developers. Sometimes wasting three days reading saves you some  
> years of pain.

I'm curious (not arguing), can you provide examples? I can't think of any  
drastic improvements to the package system.

>> I don't think this is practical until someone writes a D interpreter.
>
> CTFE interpter is already there :-)

So you think the subset of D that's CTFE-able is good enough to make an  
interactive console that's actually useful?

-- 
Best regards,
  Vladimir                            mailto:vladimir at thecybershadow.net