|
 |
On 11/10/2011 11:40 PM, Darren New wrote:
> http://colinm.org/language_checklist.html
"You appear to believe that specifying behaviours as 'undefined' means
that programmers won't rely on them."
"Unfortunately, your language lacks semicolons."
"The implementation is the spec. The implementation is closed-source."
"The name of your language makes it impossible to find on Google."
"Writing a compiler that understands English is AI-complete."
"Dangerous behaviours are only a warning."
"Noone really believes your language is faster than Prolog."
(Last I heard, Prolog is insanely slow...?)
"You have reinvented PHP, but worse."
"You have reinvented PHP but better. That's still no justification though."
"Programming in this language is adequate punishment for having invented
it."
I can't help but think this whole thing must have been written by
somebody in the FP community. Who the hell else has ever heard of
"algebraic datatypes", "category theory" or "safe statically-typed eager
functional languages"?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
|
|
Le 2011-10-11 18:40, Darren New a écrit :
> http://colinm.org/language_checklist.html
I wonder how LOLCODE would fare...
--
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/* flabreque */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/* @ */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/* gmail.com */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }
Post a reply to this message
|
|
