Re:The cost of forsaking C
by themihai on Wednesday October 05, 2016 @12:18PM
(#12645215)
You forgot to respond to the first one:
"Want minimal syntactic sugar and a language that's not prone to feature-of-the-week hipsterism"
[ Parent
| on HN ]
That's a lot of words to declare oneself a masochist
Or if being verbose is desired, do you want to do a job for a computer that you are not suited to do but the computer is?
Re:The cost of forsaking C
by atilaneves on Wednesday October 05, 2016 @07:23PM
(#12648836)
I didn't forget to respond. I consider minimal syntactic sugar a big, not a feature.
The answer to this is Scheme.
Why in God's name would I want minimal syntactic sugar?
I want optimal syntactic sugar.
Everyone has a different idea of what 'optimal' means here.
> I want optimal syntatic sugar
Like Rust or C++ templates? I prefer C syntax over the "optimal" alternative.
Why in god's name would Rust or C++ templates be the optimal amount (or optimal syntactic sugar design)?