... seems like you're describing haskell ... ... now, portage written in haskell would be really something
Il giorno ven 24 apr 2020 alle ore 14:36 Caveman Al Toraboran < toraboracave...@protonmail.com> ha scritto: > On Wednesday, April 22, 2020 8:32 PM, Michael Jones <gen...@jonesmz.com> > wrote: > > > > No-no. C++ is a nightmare. A few people want to use it. > > > > C++ is an extremely widespread language with millions of lines of code > written daily world wide. > > i think that might be misleading as it seems to > imply that being a c++ dev is mutually exclusive > against being a c dev (is it? the languages agree on > many syntaxes/features). > > i think the right way of thinking is as follows: > > 1. identify programming features needed to code > a reliable pms. i think most likely all we > need is [recursive] function calls and > if/else/loops. the rest probably has to do > with algorithms (independent of the language). > > 2. pick language that has features (1) and has the > largest users base. if the set of features in > (1) is small enough (such as ones i suggested), > then the c++ developers should be counted as c > developers (because that part is common between > c++ and c). > > 3. apply occam's razor. if two languages are > equally satisfying points (1) and (2), then > choose the simplest one. but if my thought is > correct (that we only need the subset of > features in c++ that's already in c), then c is > guaranteed to have a greater effective number > of developers in step (2). hence, we will not > even need to apply occam's razor to remove c++ > (unless points (1) and (2) result in a tie, > which i don't think it does in this case). > > > Lots of people want to use it. Just not people who want to write a PMS > compliant package manager. > > probably same kind of people that are headed to > blow their legs (and ours) in the process. > > >
