Hello, > As far as I understand the goals for the language are:
I believe that there may not be "the language" but "the system" and languages. > * increased productivity (20K lines of code) Increased productivity, I think, is not a real goal. Mathematical expressions for describing physics concepts are not there primarily to "increase productivity" of scientists, but give concise descriptions of what is going on in the world and trys to see how simple it can be. (the productivity will probably increase, but it is not a direct goal.) > * more correct code (?by using better concepts and automatic > * checking?) Some correctness has to be ultimately judged by human and it would be benefited from shorter and clear descriptions. > * ?better performance than Smalltalk? Good performance, yes, but not sure "better than Smalltalk". I sure hope that better than existing Smalltalk implementations in practical sense. > What about goals that give this language an identity: > ? easy to learn > ? minimalistic syntax > ? very readable code > ? free of unnecessary complexity > ? easy and natural to think in > ? attract many mainstream programmers > > If you say "yes" to most of them could you (and the other VPRI > members) please order them by priority? This list is clearly yours so prioritizing it may not make sense^^; I'd say that the last one is not a *goal* (while "dissemination" is mentioned, it is not something a research project pursues in general). "Minimalistic syntax" has many definition so it is hard to agree on. And, other items sound like paraphrases of the same thing. My opinion doesn't necessary reflect my employer's and colleagues, BTW. -- Yoshiki _______________________________________________ fonc mailing list [email protected] http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
