[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Lucent Technologies & Sun Microsystems

Vorobey Anatoly wrote:
> Limbo is interesting (I'm stepping on slippery ground here as I haven't
> written any nontrivial programs in it yet due to severe lack of free
> time, only read the guides, definitions and source code to some Inferno
> programs). Its simplicity doesn't seem to limit it (well,
> unions would be great). GC is useful and very well thought-out - it certainly
> doesn't irritate the C-programmer part of my soul. It's very well
> integrated inside the OS, and the OS itself presents a number of new, very
> elegant solutions to old problems (especially the namespace).
> What do you think?
> --
> Anatoly Vorobey,
> mellon@pobox.com http://pobox.com/~mellon/
> "Angels can fly because they take themselves lightly" - G.K.Chesterton


Well, I'll start by saying that I agree about Java. It doesn't seem that
promising as a language, just an example of how a technology can succeed
regardless of technical merit.

As for Limbo... I agree wholeheartedly. I have taken to writing at least
one non-trivial application, and I now wish that I could do ALL my app
development in Limbo. One of my friends made the comment that Limbo
like, "what you'd get if you gave the developers of C many years to fix
it." (=  I've still only taught myself Limbo in my spare time, but
and one other individual have written a Turing Machine Simulator as a Wm
app with Limbo/Tk. Even when we knew almost nothing about language a
feature, we'd try something, and it would work. Everyhting is so
and it is quite clear that it is a language developed by people that
not by a bunch of buzzword-crazed marketers.

Well, I've been ranting long enough. I just wanted to share my extremely
positive experience with using Limbo for a reasonably sized app.

Brian Osman
Computer Science '99
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute