Sumit Bisht wrote:Isn't this is just too much to ask from any single text.Sure, we all love to brag (in person or in public) about how much we 'know', but merely skimming over languages is just an exercise in futility(as opposed to understanding different paradigms and leveraging them in one's language of choice [for multiple paradigm languages] ) .
I agree with Bruce on his choices in Ruby, Scala and Erlang (as I am having varying experience in them), but inclusion of other languages like Io, Prolog, etc. is beyond me (and change this mix for just about everyone).
Today, don't we use domain specific languages if we want to address a 'niche' problem ?
To me, frankly speaking, this Bruce Tate's work is disappointing, unlike earlier books.
John Todd wrote:Hi Mr. Bruce,
Why in your opinion Haskell isn't being used to create real world systems?
Lisp is an alien language but it is used to create critical systems, also Lisp learning curve is among the hardest.
Is it because Haskell is an academic language and not industrial language?
Thanks.
Gian Franco wrote:Hi Bruce,
What, with the experiences of this book, would be your 8th language?
Cheers,
Gian
Hauke Ingmar Schmidt wrote:
Mohamed Sanaulla wrote:I could go to an extent to specify WHAT but I really don't know HOW to measure :)
If you find a good answer on that you have an eternal place in literature for sure. ;-)
LOC- Lines of Code? But yeah Lines of code/verbosity can often help the developer :wink: For example- if we compare Java and Scala in terms of the verbosity of code- Scala is more concise.
As I wrote before, I don't think that shorter is better automatically, I don't think that typing speed is a limiting factor. Reading the more, but shorter code is not better suited for reading automatically. Otherwise one would only need the same functionality implemented in different languages to see which is more "productive". Obviously this does not work, there are many more factors. E.g. how should a "steep learning curve" be valued?
Brett Lewinski wrote:Bruce Thanks for the Reply I appreciate it!
Mohamed Sanaulla wrote:
Bruce Tate wrote:
Other languages to consider are JavaScript for stuff beyond the browser, Go (the Google language),
JavaScript- I have never thought using them beyond browser? (this is may be my negligence towards JavaScript)
Raghavan Muthu wrote:Hi Bruce,
First of all, it was a different book I had ever come across. Thanks and Congratulations for having written such a book!
I have few questions for you. Few of them may make you feel like too personal. If so, please ignore it
1. what made you write such a book?
Raghavan Muthu wrote:
2. I had been wondering how come seven such different languages (Ruby, Io, Prolog, Scala, Erlang, Clojure, and Haskell) had been composed in one book, when there are so many books for one single language.. I had read more than one book for a particular programming language. Would like you to share the challenges specifically you had faced while composing the compact structure of it? I am sure you would NOT have covered (or you dint want to) the entire features of the languages. I am interested and curious to know!
Raghavan Muthu wrote:
3. Overall, what was the idea behind choosing these 7 languages when there are enormous programming languages? Are there any common factors behind choosing these languages?
Raghavan Muthu wrote:
4. Have you demonstrated any application/project work at the end of the book? I know you would have covered good amount of examples for each aspect of every language.
Raghavan Muthu wrote:
5. Do you think really one week will suffice for each language? :P
Raghavan Muthu wrote:
6. Have you discussed about the integration of these languages with some of the few popular programming languages like C, Java etc.? I know not always there is a need to interact with other languages. However, if there is a need, what extent is it easy to plugin?
Raghavan Muthu wrote:
7. Are there any IDEs required for the other languages Scala, Io, Erlang, Clojure etc.,? Have you got a chance to describe any of them?
Raghavan Muthu wrote:
Thanks.
Eagerly waiting to hear from you.....
Hauke Ingmar Schmidt wrote:
Bruce Tate wrote:A type is just a convenience in Io, not like a class in OOP. It's a tool used to help a programmer organize, and not one to help the language organize internally.
Hm, but there is a difference in (proto-)types and "non-type" clones, if I understood it correctly? Namely the "type" slot. It's just that this change is hidden within the capitalization that I stumbled upon. So capitalization gets part of the syntax. That's different to naming convention where e.g. constants are all-capital but this does not change semantics.
That's a pretty minor difference. I bet it is implemented in a single line of Io code. Consider the difference between, for example, Java or Ruby classes and Io types. An Io type is an object with an upper case name... period. That's pretty astounding to me, actually.
Mohamed Sanaulla wrote:
Christophe Verré wrote: ... do you also explain some of their practical use in the industry ?
This is always one of the reasons which developers look while learning a language ;)
Mohamed Sanaulla wrote:We have seen scattered discussions about different languages. So which languages can we brand as productive- both in terms of developer productivity as well as the ease of use in application development and as promising language. By promising we can think of extent to which the language would be adopted by the developer community as well as by the enterprises for application development. We saw Java as the revolution language some 15 years back, so which is that language in the current set of languages.
We could consider the Seven languages chosen by Bruce or if anyone has another language to add- it would be most welcome.
Andy Bach wrote:
Campbell Ritchie wrote:
Agree: they are already well covered elsewhere. For that sort of book, it is better to go for less well-known languages.Bruce Tate wrote: . . . Java, JavaScript, C or C++ for a variety of reasons. Mostly, they are all too popular, . . .
Just a link - Steve Yegge has lots to say about languages in his various blogs (he's very smart and funny:
http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2010/12/haskell-researchers-announce-discovery.html
) one I remembered was sort of "7 languages in one page" - Tour De Babel:
http://sites.google.com/site/steveyegge2/tour-de-babel
Vijitha Kumara wrote:Thanks Bruce. Looks like you have optimized the book probably the best possible way to serve the nature of it