From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on ip-172-31-65-14.ec2.internal X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: John McCabe Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Carbon Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2022 00:14:43 -0000 (UTC) Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Message-ID: References: <993af397-b615-44e7-ae8d-ec706f9b6098n@googlegroups.com> <5f819cdd-e763-4a96-aed5-545d57edac23n@googlegroups.com> <877d2u21ps.fsf@nightsong.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2022 00:14:43 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: reader01.eternal-september.org; posting-host="48836f3a60beee04436a3d326b36eb6d"; logging-data="454717"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+6ttm9FvUzH0JkpWolUdj56TINf2pgS34=" User-Agent: PhoNews/3.9.1 (Android/8.1.0) Cancel-Lock: sha1:8RmdcvkIdQZMeXPYkpf3iqgSrkU= In-Reply-To: <877d2u21ps.fsf@nightsong.com> Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:64231 List-Id: On 26/08/2022 21:23, Paul Rubin wrote: >Olivier Henley writes: >> This is not aggression. We need to stop relativizing definitions. > >I would call the first post somewhat aggressive, though not intensely >so. It dinged on the C++ community ("I find it shocking...") Did it ding on the C++ community any more than an announcement of Google trying to design a language that will supersede C++? > and >suggested by apophasis ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apophasis ) that >the Carbon devs should abandon their project and using Ada instead >("that might not be a bad idea"). That was never the intention; the point was to highlight the fact that there is at least one, high-performance, safe, language in existence that addresses a number of the annoyances and inadequacies of C++, and that anyone trying to 'replace' C++ should consider how they can take advantage of work that's already been done in that area. >It also treated some debateable >points as self-evident, such as that enumeration types should always >support 'Image. I don't think I said that. Java doesn't support 'Image, but they made it easy for you to provide your own' equivalent'; my point was that C++'s enum class could've gone further than it did (std::array, too), and provided some additional support for commonly needed features that many people have created complicated pre-processor macros to implement. >It seems reasonable to me for the Carbon forum moderators to disallow >and shut down language debates of any kind, even if they are not >aggressive per se. We've all seen enough of those to know how they go. >That particular language debate was especially off-topic since it was an >Ada vs C++ comparison on a Carbon forum. Ada vs Carbon would have been >better. I disagree; the forum is supposed to be about the language design, as the claimed aim is to use the community to help drive it. IMO, this is exactly the place to discuss features of other languages that could be considered useful in a 'new' language, unless the 'community' aspect is fake and the 'design' is mostly a done deal. >The second post came across to me as even more aggressive ("Can you >please specify..."). It was full of what is sometimes called >"sea-lioning", a classic passive-aggressive debating technique: > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning The second post, I presume you mean the response to mine, was _very_ aggressive. >I didn't read the later posts that were flagged as off-topic, since you >have to be logged in to view them. One rational response arguing against the 'aggressive' claim, and a couple of other defensive 'team' members getting the wrong end of the stick, from what I remember. >> Hordes of people wrote that (along those lines --> "Ada typing is >> nonsense, crazy, mad, stupid, etc") and nobody in this community ever >> canceled them by weaponizing, eg.: "it is demeaning to people working >> on the ARG" ... therefore this is aggression. > >This is a general, open discussion forum, not the equivalent of an >internal forum of the ARG itself. I could understand if an internal ARG >forum locked threads calling Ada typing nonsense, crazy, mad, stupid, etc. The Carbon Forum has nothing to do with C++; it's a forum aimed at getting a 'community' involved in the design and development of a new language that was, essentially, claiming to be a replacement for C++. >> If C++ is "fully baked" and still needs Carbon, I will be damned. > >I haven't looked into Carbon much, but C++ is hampered by having to >support 40 years of legacy code. That wasn't the point; the point is, as I mentioned, that _new_ features are being added that are not fully designed/defined/implemented; look at, for example, the excuse for the missing operator+() on std::filesystem::path. >Carbon doesn't have to be backwards >compatible at the language level, as long as it can interoperate. Exactly, and its syntax does not have to continue to follow C++'s where doing so means inheriting syntactic features (like "="/"==") that have been error-prone for 50+ years!