Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon.

Pages: 1-

20 YEARS FROM NOW

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-04 14:59

Every language currently used (except Python) will be regarded as stone age technology that isn't useful to anyone ever.  Python will become the Scheme.

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-04 15:01

OH GOD I CANT WAIT TO CUM

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-04 15:05

I doubt it. 40 years from now we'll just have finally killed fortran

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-04 15:11

>>3
ack! No more /b/!?!?

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-04 15:14

As long as it loses most of its idiocy, which then will have it be classified as just another dialect of C.

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-04 15:27

>python
>becoming Scheme

nope.avi, you'll be forever a worthless scripting language.

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-04 15:34

>>6
0/10

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-04 15:52

20 years from now programming will be done by computer and we will simply gesture in the air to describe what happens and the computer will implement it

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-04 16:03

>>9
20 years from now we will still be using C and C++.

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-04 16:22

There will still be Java.
And Perl.
I don't know which of those realities is scarier.

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-04 16:38

>>10
Perl will be Perl 6, Java will be the new COBOL. While I hope that by far Perl 6 will have a decent implementation, the Java part is hell scarier to me.

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-04 16:44

>>11
Perl 6 will still be slower than molasses, everyone will use Perl 5.

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-04 16:48

>>12
Perl 6 vs Ruby. Go!

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-04 17:00

>>13
AIDS vs AIDS and a pair of sunglasses. Go!

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-04 18:35

>>1
Python needs several features (mostly statements as expressions hence better lambda and tail call optimization, with cudder-based lists a distant third) and no Guido in order to become Scheme. And no GIL either would help.

>>8
I've heard this story from 30 years ago.

>>9
:(

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-04 18:40

>>15
tail call optimization ... GIL
These are implementation issues, not language features. CPython may be the official implementation, but it's far from the only one.
I agree with you as far as getting rid of statements and Gweedo goes, though.

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-04 18:42

We will be writing in RPG Maker '97 programming scripts.

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-04 18:57

>>16
As an implementation feature, TCO is an optional optimization, as in CL (even though anything that's not a piece of shit ought to do it). However, I want it as a specified language feature, as in Scheme, which means you can safely rely on it to write programs.

The GIL is more of an implementation feature since threading does work on CPython, even if it sucks.

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-05 1:05

>>18
Fucking agreed with you.

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-05 7:05

20 years from now we will have optic processors

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-08 21:35

>>13
$ # I don't know ruby so I just typed random letters here
$ time ruby -e'puts (0..9999).reduce :+'
49995000

real    0m0.006s
user    0m0.003s
sys    0m0.002s
$ time perl6 -e'say [+] ^10000'
49995000

real    0m25.437s
user    0m24.136s
sys    0m1.283s

_____________________
Sent from my Rakudo.

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-09 0:06

>>21
$ time perl -e'$count=0;while($count <= 9999){$count++;}'
real    0m0.005s
user    0m0.007s
sys    0m0.000s

$ time ruby -e'puts (0..9999).reduce :+'
real    0m0.013s
user    0m0.010s
sys    0m0.000s

You're stupid.

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-09 1:30

In the future everything will be done in the browser. The applications will be delivered as javascript. The server-side application will be deployed in javascript. The server will be written in javascript. The browser will be written in javascript. The OS, both client and server, will be written in Javascript. To program, you will use a javascript editor in your browser.

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-09 2:25

>>22
Wow, it's like you've never heard of numbers.

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-09 2:38

Twenty years into the future, computers will have a Terabyte of RAM with nothing but solid-state drives and hyper-threading processors, and programmes will still be slow as fuck. People will still defend their horrible programming practices by saying "optimisation does not make a difference in today's hardware."

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-09 2:55

>>21
Try timing from within the repl. I know it sucks, but for anything that light you're just measuring the startup time.

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-09 3:28

>>26
25 seconds
light
It's not light for Perl6; that's the entire point.  Startup time is a small fraction of that.

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-09 9:02

>>25
It's more like, "Fuck premature optamisation. I've got a bajillion things to get done so if it isn't a strict requirement, the naive implementation should work fine."

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-09 14:18

>>27
It was a small fraction when I tried it. Yes, Rakudo is slow, I'm not contradicting that.

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-09 15:38

>>25
... 1TB of RAM doesn't faze me. The projected 1GB of on-die cache on the other hand is a bit absurd.

Name: Anonymous 2010-10-09 16:03

>>30
Working at Intel is all about going beyond the impossible and kicking reason to the curb.

Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List