Timeline for Why are there so many programming languages? Why are new languages still being made?
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 22, 2020 at 21:00 | comment | added | Thorbjørn Ravn Andersen | Java was originally designed to run untrusted, downloaded code. Somebody saw a usecase in having a browser being able to do exactly that. Then it grew into being suitable for long running server side programs (and primarily that). C# was a Java clone but grew into something else. | |
| May 12, 2019 at 7:47 | comment | added | Giorgio | @RationalGeek: As far as I know, Java was introduced (at least in part) to address complexities with C++. C# was introduced a few years later as a competitor to Java after Microsoft had tried to produce an incompatible version of Java. | |
| May 12, 2019 at 6:19 | comment | added | NoChance | Imagine going from c# to ksh or Scheme :) | |
| May 1, 2014 at 22:06 | comment | added | Magus | Isn't the correct way out of the cycle just Lisp? Your DSLs are localized that way :D | |
| Aug 20, 2012 at 16:27 | comment | added | gbjbaanb | @jkohlhepp - not necessarily, you have to understand most OSS is used by commercial entities, such as IBM, and they employ people to improve them so they have the same benefits as a commercial product. | |
| Jun 17, 2011 at 1:15 | comment | added | user8709 | C# has plenty of features, but it's still a cleaner language than C++. Newer additions such as LINQ allow you to do things cleanly that you can't easily do in C++. I think it's more likely that there's two kinds of conservation of complexity - one where some complexity is inherent in a problem, and one where as you eliminate one kind of redundant complexity from your programs, the requirements get more complex - complexity, like data, expands to fill the "space" available. | |
| Sep 27, 2010 at 16:43 | comment | added | RationalGeek | This is true. The drive to add new features in order to get more money from the market certainly cannot be ignored. However, it is a double-edged sword. You can expect new features from a commercially-backed product for this exact reason. But from an open source product, you only get new features for as long as the volunteer army stays interested, and there is someone of skill at the helm to herd the cats. | |
| Sep 27, 2010 at 15:36 | comment | added | g.f | Good point, but i think another fact is at play with C# - it's a commercial product which doesn't exist for charitable reasons and for market acceptance / keeping your customers products have to be "improved" for new releases etc. | |
| Sep 27, 2010 at 14:45 | comment | added | RationalGeek | Well, I think both C# and Java were introduced at least in part to address complexities with C++. And now, if you look at both of those languages several versions later, their syntax and feature sets are getting complex enough where people are starting to talk about them being "over the hill". Just my take on it though I can't prove anything. :-) | |
| Sep 27, 2010 at 14:21 | comment | added | back2dos | This definitely is true for libraries, frameworks and software, but I personally don't know of a language this applies to. Do you have examples? | |
| Sep 27, 2010 at 13:13 | history | answered | RationalGeek | CC BY-SA 2.5 |