The ideal performance property we should ask of a high-level programming language and library is that it minimizes runtime and compile-time combinatorial complexity. We can accept constant overheads, but not higher-order overheads. This has many implications.
-
-
What do you think about
#golang ? It seems to meet most (though not all) of the ideas you've expressed in these threads. Was going to wait in ask when you come by the Seattle Epic offices in Feb, but thought I might as well as here. :) -
A language needs to thoroughly tackle generics in order to stay on the mainline of the programming language tech tree, which undoubtedly grows to support constructive logic proofs-as-programs.
Kraj razgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
Designing good languages is pretty easy. You just ask "what does JavaScript do" and then make that a fatal compile error.
- Još 2 druga odgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
I am not on board with most of this stuff, but if you follow these threads in a serious way I'll be interested to see where it goes.
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
-
-
These principles have a cost. If your principles and current CPUs disagree on how things are computed and what is fast, you are looking at unpredictable performance cliffs, unpredictable complex compiler optimizations, or likely both. Are those worth it, and for who?
-
"performance" is not just for people writing game engines, a language that makes 10x faster "easy" also buys you simplicity and elegance in code where I have to spend less time second guessing the implementation, playing whack-a-mole with these "cliffs".
- Još 1 odgovor
Novi razgovor -
-
-
What do you think of PureBasic? http://www.purebasic.com
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.