My answer can be best expressed simply and deeply thus: "I don't see the unix command 'ls' being rewritten every day or even every year."
Do you understand what I'm trying to get at? It's possible to use an 'ls' replacement if I so choose, but that's simply my preference. 'ls' itself hasn't been touched much in a long time. The same as the ADD assembler instruction is pretty similar across platforms. Get my drift? Part of the role of a language meta-description is implementation of every translatable artefact. Thus if some source item requires some widget, that widget comes with it along for the ride as part of the source language (and framework) meta-description. I'm possibly missing something, but I don't see the future as being a simple extension of the past... it should not be that we simply create "bigger worlds" as we've done in the past (think virtual machines) but rather looks for ways to adapt things from worlds to integrate with each other. Thus, I should not be looking for a better IDE, or programming environment, but rather take the things I like out of what exists... some people like to type their code, others like to drag 'n drop it. I see no reason why we can't stop trying to re-create entire universes inside the machines we use and simply split things at a component-level. We're surely smarter than reinventing the same pattern again and again. Julian. On 11/10/2010, at 2:39 AM, Paul D. Fernhout wrote: > Software is never "done". :-) Especially because the world keeps changing > around it. :-) And especially when it is "research" and doing basic research > looking for new ideas. :-) _______________________________________________ fonc mailing list [email protected] http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
