1. 39
  1.  

  2. 6

    Is there a video link for this talk? I want to watch it!

    1. 6

      Does anyone know of cases where a big language with a big compiler code base goes through the kind of renewal that Stephen implies here? It seems like the way that usually happens is not incrementally but a step function when someone creates a new language derived from the old one.

      1. 4

        Maybe C++ going from C++98 to C++11?

        It’s not quite the same, though, because C++ has multiple compilers and a larger user base.

        1. 3

          a step function when someone creates a new language derived from the old one.

          Yes, historically that has been the case.

        2. 5

          I think this is more a wishful thinking that a solid plan for the future, as there is nothing concrete given on how to achieve a long term success. Also, when looking how our interaction with the technology evolves, wouldn’t the language of the future look more like a natural language then something full of weird symbols (=<<, $, …). I agree that Haskell brings a lot of great stuff, but the tooling is far, far away from perfect and with the amount of extensions, it resembles the natural language in the sense that there are so many different dialects, that might hamper the understanding.

          1. 9

            Why would natural language be selected for? Plenty of older languages were more wordy (Pascal, Cobol, SML to an extent) and they’ve been mostly replaced with more symbol-heavy languages today.

            1. 1

              Given how our interactions with computers change, that is my interpretation. I might be wrong, and time will tell :)

              I don’t think current languages are symbol heavy, at least not as much as Haskell is. There are some special languages like APL or Perl family, but most of the mainstream languages are pretty sane in that regard (Python, Java, Go, …).