[Pharo-project] Enjoyed the reading..

Ben Coman btc at openInWorld.com
Sat Mar 10 04:37:21 EST 2012


Off topic... but the following article by Paul Graham has been one of my 
all time favorites for the last few years...
http://www.paulgraham.com/nerds.html

Eliot Miranda wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 3:02 PM, Igor Stasenko <siguctua at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>   
>> According to this guy, we're using 3rd most powful programming
>> language (or, well one of 4.. to not insult anyone ;).
>>
>> http://www.paulgraham.com/icad.html
>>
>> So, we're not that bad, eh? :)
>>
>>     
>
> I like what he says about patterns:
>
> "If you try to solve a hard problem, the question is not whether you will
> use a powerful enough language, but whether you will (a) use a powerful
> language, (b) write a de facto interpreter for one, or (c) yourself become
> a human compiler for one. We see this already begining to happen in the
> Python example, where we are in effect simulating the code that a compiler
> would generate to implement a lexical variable.
>
> This practice is not only common, but institutionalized. For example, in
> the OO world you hear a good deal about "patterns". I wonder if these
> patterns are not sometimes evidence of case (c), the human compiler, at
> work. When I see patterns in my programs, I consider it a sign of trouble.
> The shape of a program should reflect only the problem it needs to solve.
> Any other regularity in the code is a sign, to me at least, that I'm using
> abstractions that aren't powerful enough-- often that I'm generating by
> hand the expansions of some macro that I need to write."
>
>
>   
>> A very good explanation to 'pointy-haired' why 'mainstream' language
>> are not best choice..
>> as well as good illustration that in order to compete and stay
>> popular, all mainstream languages
>> will slowly converge to lisp.
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> Igor Stasenko.
>>
>>
>>     
>
>
>   





More information about the Pharo-dev mailing list