On 2011-11-14 21:52:30 +0000, Walter Bright <newshou...@digitalmars.com> said:
On 11/14/2011 11:41 AM, Michel Fortin wrote:
- Convenience
- Power
- Efficiency
My problem with those three are those are the goals of every single
computer language ever invented. They are completely and fatuously
generic.
Very true. I wasn't really suggesting we use the words from this list,
it was more an attempt at exposing how little they meant compared to
the other triplet.
> - Modern convenience
"Modern" implies using the latest ideas and techniques in computer
languages. Modern has been used successfully in Andrei's books to
convey that, which is why I suggested using the word.
> - Multi-paradigm power
Many newly-designed languages are wrapped around a single paradigm, and
they set a store by being so. D most assuredly and pointedly has
different take on that.
> - Native efficiency
Most (nearly all?) new languages are targeted at a VM. Being native is
clearly a distinguishing feature of D.
Personally I rather like Modern, Multi-paradigm, and Native. It's
convenience, power, and efficency I'd rather remove, because they are
fatuously generic (your words) and effectively dilute what you're
trying to convey, at least when *I* read.
Beside, it should be telling that in each of your three descriptions
above, you talked about what it meant being modern, you talked about
single-paradigm languages, and about being native vs. VM. Nowhere did
you mention convenience, power, and efficiency… perhaps because those
are too generic or too implicit to talk about.
--
Michel Fortin
michel.for...@michelf.com
http://michelf.com/
