When I review progrmaming languages, I often struggle with deciding whether something calls for praise/criticism or should be considered default and not having it would call for praise/criticism. In the interests of keeping my language reviews consistent and fair, I outta try to lay out a "baseline" to compare to.

First: I generally don't think much of "higher and lower level languages shouldn't be compared". I think that's true at the bottom level: things like kernels and interpreters do pretty much have to be written in C or something similar, but outside of that, "low-level" is generally code for "low-power". Paul Graham made the point really well so I'll just leave it to him (heading "The Blub Paradox").

One major trait I think is legitimately horizontal is interpretation versus compilation. Or to be more precise, it's obviously ideal to be both (Haskell proves it's possible), but my baseline is "either one". Interactive use is incredibly useful, but compilation gives better performance and portability.

This page was last modified 2020 Jun 28, Sunday, 00:50 (UTC)