[om-list] languages

[Mark Butler]

Well we should keep in mind that database design is a heavily restricted form
of declarative language design - developing a OneModel meta-model is the same. 

I generally agree with ESR too, with a couple of comments.  First, I think
Python's use of white space oriented syntax is brain dead. Second, for all its
hereditary weaknesses, C++ is a much more semantically pure, consistent, and
powerful language than Java is.

Both Java and Python are hopelessly low level languages even for normal
business programming - A decent business programming language needs to support
persistence properly so that programmers do not spend half of their time
writing code to prepare and bind statements in archaic query languages like
SQL.

The big problem I have with Java is it is a monolithic solution to at least
three different problems: the need for a better programming language, a common
system library, and platform independent code distribution. If Java hadn't
thrown out so many powerful C++ features (e.g. templates and operator
overloading) it would have much better prospects for replacing C++ in
commercial software development. 

In general I think the future lies in the direction of incrementally adding
more high level language features (C++ style, except rationalized) rather than
removing them to make the compiler writer's job easier.

- Mark

Luke Call wrote:
> 
> The old language debate....
> 
> Actually, rather than debating I thought I'd throw out this URL in case
> I haven't before. ESR talks about various things related to language; my
> experience largely agrees with his, though not totally. Only FWIW:
> 
> http://tuxedo.org/~esr/writings/taoup/chapter3.html
> 
> (tonight I'm trying to get stuff done so I can get back to the project
> tomorrow for a change--framerd experimenting again. Yeah, same old lame
> talk....)