News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Stevey's Blog Rants: Rich Programmer Food by far33d on Friday June 22, 2007 @05:21PM (#30152)
Well, this is certainly an argument for more simple languages (syntactically) like LISP, C, even Tcl, over C++ and Java. Because I don't think anyone really understands how the C++ compiler really works (it took a looooong time to get a C++ compiler that actually adhered to the standard).
Re:Stevey's Blog Rants: Rich Programmer Food by paul on Friday June 22, 2007 @05:42PM (#30164)
I wouldn't put c++ in the same category as Java. C++ has many layers of "stuff" (templates, macros, etc) while the Java compiler is so simple that you can easily do a reverse-compile.

Personally, I'd rather have a useful syntax and maybe a standard parser that gives easy access to the parse tree. I wrote a Javascript-to-Javascript compiler (that did optimization and correctness checks along the way) once and the fact that JS has syntax wasn't a big problem. (especially since I ripped off the parser from Rhino)

Re:Stevey's Blog Rants: Rich Programmer Food by far33d on Friday June 22, 2007 @09:20PM (#30211)
My mistake on Java - frankly, I haven't written any in quite a while.
Re:Stevey's Blog Rants: Rich Programmer Food by palish on Saturday June 23, 2007 @03:33PM (#30300)
Lisp has no syntax. :)
Re:Stevey's Blog Rants: Rich Programmer Food by tx on Friday June 22, 2007 @05:49PM (#30168)
Java has much simpler syntax than C, you got your buckets wrong.