On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 08:47:21AM +0000, Boyd wrote: [...] > I've been experimenting with language design a bit and I found that > a much bigger issue with coding, is that we still use files and > plain text. An IDE where code is represented in a simple tree and > saved in a database, for example, would improve things dramatically, > and no language changes would be necessary.
I disagree with that direction. The advantage of a text format is that it can represent *anything* (suitably serialized, of course), and that when things go wrong with your tools (IDE corrupts the file, or doesn't support certain operations, or, for that matter, you're working in an environment where no IDE is available and all you have is a bare-bones text editor), you have a way of reaching into the data and fixing it yourself. Having a custom binary representation of the code makes it impossible to manipulate outside of the IDE, which makes data recovery very time-consuming or impossible. That's not to say that plain text is the best representation for code, of course. But I have yet to find an alternative that doesn't suck, and that offers advantages that plain text can't offer. This isn't the first time this idea came up. I've heard of many attempts to replace text representation for code, and all of them sucked. If you think you have a superior representation, please convince me otherwise. T -- Elegant or ugly code as well as fine or rude sentences have something in common: they don't depend on the language. -- Luca De Vitis
