Path: csiph.com!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder3.hal-mli.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!nx02.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!novia!news-out.readnews.com!news-xxxfer.readnews.com!news.misty.com!news.iecc.com!nerds-end From: torbenm@diku.dk (Torben Ægidius Mogensen) Newsgroups: comp.compilers Subject: Re: Have we reached the asymptotic plateau of innovation in programming la Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 09:24:26 +0100 Organization: SunSITE.dk - Supporting Open source Lines: 31 Sender: news@iecc.com Approved: comp.compilers@iecc.com Message-ID: <12-03-037@comp.compilers> References: <12-03-012@comp.compilers> <12-03-014@comp.compilers> <12-03-022@comp.compilers> <12-03-027@comp.compilers> <12-03-030@comp.compilers> NNTP-Posting-Host: news.iecc.com X-Trace: leila.iecc.com 1331777511 99671 64.57.183.58 (15 Mar 2012 02:11:51 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@iecc.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 02:11:51 +0000 (UTC) Keywords: design, history Posted-Date: 14 Mar 2012 22:11:51 EDT X-submission-address: compilers@iecc.com X-moderator-address: compilers-request@iecc.com X-FAQ-and-archives: http://compilers.iecc.com Xref: csiph.com comp.compilers:504 BGB writes: > it does seem however, that on average, languages are becoming gradually > more general purpose, and the distance between "different" languages > seems to be gradually shrinking. It is true that languages tends to grow over time to the point where they have everything: Objects, functional values, static types, dynamic types, lazy evaluation, strict evaluation, pure functions, impure functions, parametric polymorphish, interfaces, message passing, query sublanguages, etc., all in one language. In this respect, languages tend to grow more general-purpose and more similar. But at the same time, there is an increasing trend of domain-specific languages: Languages designed for _very_ specific problem domains. While these previously usually looked a lot like existing languages but with a few added constructs or standard data types, they are increasingly designed from the ground up for supporting the specific problem domain -- they are often not Turing-complete, and they may have complex type systems or restrictions that ensure domain-specific constraints (such as resource usage or analysability). And they often have syntax that look nothing like traditional PL syntax. So the way I see it, there is a widening range of languages from monstrous general-purpose languages with huge standard libraries to tiny domain-specific languages with no libraries to speak of and everything in-between. And while the languages at one end of the spectrum tend to converge, the languages at the other end diverge more and more. Torben