Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!eternal-september.org!feeder2.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Don Y Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design Subject: Re: OT: Linix goes politics Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2024 14:45:07 -0700 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 26 Message-ID: References: <04jqhjdoje7mjhueqi3iusubfg3vs7plql@4ax.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2024 23:45:19 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="0c873b542577b9bc8b6e85ea9e6e6db2"; logging-data="4089999"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/LIJpt4bnDRWzKUantN1EP" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.2.2 Cancel-Lock: sha1:t4yrCO+xTa5lJrN1hNicv0xj+m0= Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: Bytes: 2224 On 10/26/2024 2:19 PM, Joe Gwinn wrote: > It's 9000 languages. This was discussed on SED in February 2023. My > posting on the subject is "Re: dead programming languages" posted on > 23 February 2023. This is the posting that went into ecosystems and > other practicalities. Most languages just change the syntax of operations. OTOH, many introduce (or, promote to first-class notions) techniques and mechanisms that are tedious to implement in other languages. E.g., support for concurrency has to be added to most languages; there are no notions of having other processes running alongside "yours"; thus, no mechanisms for exchanging information with them, no mechanisms to ensure competing accesses to data are atomic, etc. Imagine using C (or any other programming language) to *interact* with a relational database... how many errors would a user likely make by failing to address the issues that SQL hides?