The Tragedy of the Common Lisp, or, Why Large Languages Explode (was: revive let blocks)
Mark S. Miller
erights at google.com
Fri Jun 19 18:32:22 UTC 2015
"use strict" was only a breaking change regarding ES3 code that
coincidentally happened to use exactly this literal string as a do-nothing
expression statement in exactly this position. In all of the web, we have
not run across a single incident of this happening accidentally.
For the record, not only have we successfully deprecated one feature, we
have even wounded it sufficiently that I expect most of us will outlive it:
function.caller, function.arguments, arguments.caller,
But note the effort it took to wound it and the time it is taking to die.
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 11:23 AM, Alexander Jones <alex at weej.com> wrote:
> In all of the examples I mentioned there are other, more predictable
> programmers in 2025 to remember to use Number.isNaN instead of isNaN? I
> really don't understand why people think "use strict" was OK to pull off,
> but further breaking-change evolutions of the language are not.
> On Friday, June 19, 2015, Andreas Rossberg <rossberg at google.com> wrote:
>> On 19 June 2015 at 10:06, Alexander Jones <alex at weej.com> wrote:
>>> If people are unable to internalize the whole language, then surely we
>>> need a way to remove cruft and idiosyncracies in it, lest the language
>>> stagnate beyond repair.
>>> Removing var, typeof, exotic objects, function declarations, IsNaN, ==,
>>> enumerable properties, are just a few examples of things we should not be
>>> frightened to talk about.
>>> While I don't personally see a need for the proposed let syntax, I think
>>> that concerns about the language growing uncontrollably should be directed
>>> at its apparent lack of deprecation strategy, rather than shutting down
>>> discussion of new ideas that might help us write better programs.
>> While I agree that the impossibility of deprecating features is a problem
>> (without a solution in JS), it's also fair to say that deprecation doesn't
>> really work or help. Take C++ as the obvious example. They do deprecate
>> occasionally, with difficulties. Yet the language had already blown
>> complexity out of any sane proportion 25 years ago. Let alone today. Not a
>> chance that there is a single person who _even remotely_ understands the
>> full language, and there probably hasn't been one for 3 decades at least.
>> Deprecation doesn't solve the problem because new cruft typically gets
>> added orders of magnitude faster than old cruft can ever be removed. That
>> is true for almost all production languages. Because it's so much easier to
>> add stuff.
>> Thus, the only way to keep a language small (if at all) is being extra
>> careful about adding features. Just about any terrible feature can be
>> justified by "use cases", but that's insufficient reason to add it.
>> Especially "convenience" features are a slippery slope. (I could make a
>> list of ES6 additions that already violate this principle.)
>> The art in language design isn't what to add, but what to leave out.
>>> On Thursday, June 18, 2015, Allen Wirfs-Brock <allen at wirfs-brock.com>
>>>> On Jun 18, 2015, at 12:18 PM, Andreas Rossberg wrote:
>>>> On 18 June 2015 at 19:26, Benjamin Gruenbaum <benjamingr at gmail.com>
>>>>> This is a mailing list comprised of people who typically have a much
>>>>> better understanding of the language and its corners than most (even
>>>>> professional) developers have (and dare I say, are interested in or care
>>>>> about having). With ES6 the language already got a *lot* bigger and I'd
>>>>> argue that it's now harder to learn the whole. The tradeoffs were
>>>>> worthwhile but it's definitely an issue.
>>>> I dare say that at this point Allen probably is the only person in the
>>>> world who actually fully knows and understands the complete language. I
>>>> won't hesitate to admit that I don't. ;)
>>>> And I occasionally have to go and look up details.
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss