You can see slides from the Links meeting here and commentary and pictures here. (Thanks to Ethan Aubin for already starting a thread under the former, and to Ehud Lamm for inviting me to guest blog.)
Ethan Aubin writes:
So why do we need a new language? What cannot be accomplished with existing frameworks? There is a slide following this asking why can't you do this in Haskell or ML, but I don't know why they (or even java/php/etc) aren't enough.Let me try to answer this. Links is aimed at doing certain specific things.
Is it a good enough argument? Is this enough of an advantage to get folk to move from PHP, Perl, Python? Not clear. I suspect if it is good enough, a major motivating factor is not going to be anything deep, but simply the fact that being able to write everything down in one language instead of three or four will make people's brains hurt less.
Ethan Aubin also writes:
Wadler goes into the FP success stories, Kleisli, Xduce, PLT Scheme (Continuations on the Web), Erlang. If you take the befenits of these individually, you've got a language which solves the 3-tier problem better than what we have now, but I don't think it meet the criteria of "permitting its users to do something that cannot be done in any other way". So, I'd like to ask the all the perl/php/asp/pythonistas on LtU, what it is the killer-app that that your language cannot handle?I'd love to see answers to this question!
Active forum topics
New forum topics