A Possible Future of Software Development

I couldn't find this video anywhere on LtU, although it is a little old, and I'm not up-to-date with what Adobe is working on as of late. In any case, this happens to be a favorite video of mine. It is a clear demonstration of how Computer Science can be put to efffective use with the right understanding. These guys really know what they're doing with this, and happen to be close to many of my thoughts, ideas, beleifs about software development. Consider it food for thought.

A Possible Future of Software Development

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Sort of discussed before...

See: Adobe Releases Adam & Eve

Adam & Eve is most of what Parent is talking about in that video to Texas A&M students

and somewhat related

Stepanov's book is out now. I ordered it to take advantage of a coupon that was about to expire, but haven't gotten a chance to read any of it yet. Anyone done so and have any thoughts on it?

And I'll repeat my request (as I suspect my chances of getting a pointer to an academic paper here might be slightly higher than in the youtube comment threads :)... Does anyone happen to know the paper mentioned around 0:48:00 - 0:50:00 in the video? I couldn't make out the names well and a couple searches weren't bringing up anything similar.

Paper Mentioned

Don't know which paper is being referred to, but I think the names of the authors he cites are Douglas Gregor and Jaakko Järvi.

Paper mentioned

Yes, he names those two "and all that crew," but I couldn't hear the question he's responding to so I'm not sure which paper he's referring to. He says it's a survey paper, so it might be

R. Garcia, J. Järvi, A. Lumsdaine, J. Siek, and J. Willcock, A Comparative Study of Language Support for Generic Programming, Proceedings of the 18th ACM SIGPLAN conference on Object-oriented programing, systems, languages, and applications, pp. 115–134, ACM Press (October 2003).

Which was discussed here a

Which was discussed here a long time ago.

Journal version

There is an updated and extended journal version of that paper now. Unfortunately, I don't know of a free pointer.

Someone should check what

Someone should check what are the differences between the two versions...


Thanks for the pointers.

I haven't read the full length paper in depth, but they seem pretty close overall, and certainly not worth paying for the extra unless you're really interested. From reading the original, and a brief skim of the JFP paper, I noticed the latter:

  • Added OCaml (OO specific stuff, as opposed to modules), and Cecil to the languages reviewed. (sorry, no Ada)
  • Made a few tweaks to the criteria in their table of ratings
  • Looked at released Java generics, rather that the prereleased design available in the original. (not sure what/if any differences would be)

Thanks! Much appreciated.

Thanks! Much appreciated.