C Is Not a Low-level Language (2018)

Re:C Is Not a Low-level Language (2018) by drran on Tuesday December 28, 2021 @10:31AM (#29714640)

Such explanation can be like this:

  apt-get install foo bar baz

Just few words, but they can generate very complex ready to run systems.

Unfortunately, this is not a general-purpose language, but apt + shell is.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:C Is Not a Low-level Language (2018) by usrbinbash on Tuesday December 28, 2021 @11:52AM (#29715432)

How is this the "explanation of a goal"?

I issue an imperative command to apt-get, and it tries to execute it.

It has no knowledge of why I want foo bar and baz installed, nor can it decide if these 3 programs make sense for what I am trying to do, or if there is a better way to do it (maybe there is a package "bazinga", that can replace the foo-bar-baz stack?).

A goal-aware package manager would look like this:

   super-apt "i need the system ready to function as a webserver, with a high availability database and backup capabilities"

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:C Is Not a Low-level Language (2018) by drran on Wednesday December 29, 2021 @05:23AM (#29723531)

> A goal-aware package manager would look like this:

A typical package manager is already goal-aware, like `make`. It's input DSL is far from English, but it's not hard to translate your English sentence into «apache postgress rsync» by matching text to package descriptions.

Package manager requires a solver for dependencies, constraints, and conflicts, which is far from trivial. For example, Fedora(RedHat) switched from in-house solver for yum/dnf to zypper SAT solver (libzypp) developed by SuSE/Ximian/Novell.

Unfortunately, package managers are DSL, not a general purpose language.

[ Parent | on HN ]