←back to thread

200 points jorangreef | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.222s | source
Show context
Kednicma ◴[] No.24292785[source]
I hope that we're not stuck writing piles of low-level code for all eternity. We don't need more than a few pages of each low-level language, and while I do really like Zig's qualities compared to C, I'd still like to minimize the amount of Zig or C total that has to be written.

I think that our community's equivalent of "where's my flying car?" is "where's my higher-level language?"

replies(6): >>24292855 #>>24293009 #>>24293085 #>>24293278 #>>24293542 #>>24297763 #
pron ◴[] No.24293085[source]
Who's the "we" who are "stuck"? The vast majority of programmers don't use low-level languages for writing applications even today, but there is a big niche of domains where close to perfect control is needed and that's the domain low level languages like C, C++, Ada, Rust and Zig try to address. I wouldn't (and don't) write "ordinary" applications in those languages, but I don't think the domains they target will ever go away or become less important.
replies(2): >>24293221 #>>24293304 #
1. pjmlp ◴[] No.24293304[source]
For me the way to go are languages that go all the way, C++, Ada, Object Pascal, even .NET and Java could fit into it, if the low level story ever gets straight. Currently AOT like .NET Native seems on the right path to achieve it.

Burroughs, Mesa, Modula, Oberon, Interlisp-D,... were on the right path, but in technology not always the best ideas win.