Conversation

steveklabnik
@steveklabnik
unlike games, where there is just a hose of money, languages are a cost center. it is MASSIVELY expensive to make a new production programming language. mind-bogglingly so. the new cohort of langs have at least one massive company backing at least development costs.
2
39
steveklabnik
@steveklabnik
1994-1995 was an amazing two years 2002 to ~2013 was an amazing ten years this is just gonna keep getting bigger and longer over time, i think.
1
17
steveklabnik
@steveklabnik
... maybe i am pessimistic. we'll see. anyway. hope you're okay with like, fifteen tweets in response, haha. that's where my head is at, currently.
1
14
fogus
@fogus
15 tweets in response is an absolute thrill! Thanks for taking the time and sharing your thoughts. They've given me a lot to chew on.
1
20
steveklabnik
@steveklabnik
👍 thanks for a writing prompt :D this is a topic that's worried me for a while. and there *is* at least one new language that doesn't have a big company that might still make it. i think most of them have basically peaked. not naming names because it's a bit gauche.
2
15
max
@maxbittker
love your analogy...makes me look forward to the future when a new generation of programming language tooling / distribution gives us another indie explosion
1
8
deech
@deech
I've been rep'ing indie langs for a while now. I strongly suspect the next gen langs will make interop with incumbents and "outer-op" a design centerpiece.
2
9
deech
@deech
Prof. Amal Ahmed had a talk in type level interop at Strange Loop a few years ago but that research seems to have stalled. I /think/ that will become more of a thing.
2
8