🚀 go-pugleaf

jlg@cochiti.lanl.gov (J. Giles) writes:
: A few *simple* languages would be a much better programming environment 
: than one complicated language.  And, programming should consist of writing
: the algorithms and data structures appropriate to the problem at hand,
: and then picking whichever language(s) are available and most appropriate
: for the chosen structures.

Yes.  Now, here's a complaint dressed as a question.  

Why do language designers never consider the interface to another language
worthy of the slightest standardization?  

The implementation will of course be dependent on specific languages and
compilers, but still there is enough commonality between langauges to allow
a basic level of interaction.

It's as if they consider the language to live in a pure world of its own,
uncontaminated by influences from the real world.

For example.  Why doesn't the ANSI C committees define "official" interfaces
to FORTRAN (and Fortran) and vice versa?  Neither is about to disappear next
week.  For other less common languages, this is even MORE important as
you're likely to find library components and other necessary tools in
languages other than your primary one.

: -- 
: J. Giles

--
-Matt Kennel  		mbk@inls1.ucsd.edu
-Institute for Nonlinear Science, University of California, San Diego
-*** AD: Archive for nonlinear dynamics papers & programs: FTP to
-***     lyapunov.ucsd.edu, username "anonymous".