30 Jan
2006
30 Jan
'06
12:46 p.m.
In article <200601302009.MAA24784 at ca2h0430.amd.com>,
"Dwight Elvey" <dwight.elvey at amd.com> writes:
As Richard mentions, it is an un-typed language. For
many, this puts it in a lower class of programming language.
I don't know that I consider it a lower-class language, but a
different class of language :-).
It's main advantage for larger projects is that
one
transforms the language into a language that makes sense
for that project. [...]
Agreed.
Since the language is often redefined around the
project,
it often requires strong project leadership [...]
I don't see this very often, unfortunately. Too often I see weak
project leadership -- sometimes weak to the point of being
non-existent.
It is also called a programmer amplifier. A good
programmer will write better code but a bad programmer
will write really bad code.
Agreed. Good programmers are something of an unfortunate rarity as
well.
One of the ideas that I took from my experiments with FORTH is to
focus my 'factoring' efforts on the smallest idioms I can get away
with in the language. For C++ this means I use inline function idioms
a lot, small idiomatic helper classes less often, and hardly ever use
large frameworks.
I like FORTH for minicomputer projects simply because its very
expressive in a small space. Hrm... I should try and get a FORTH
interpreter running on my 11/03!
--
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline"-- code samples, sample chapter, FAQ:
<http://www.xmission.com/~legalize/book/>
Pilgrimage: Utah's annual demoparty
<http://pilgrimage.scene.org>