• Elise
    link
    fedilink
    21 year ago

    As a game dev updating my ancient backend knowledge I really was confused about this specific topic.

    And I feel the same way about the many new languages. Why not just upgrade the existing ones.

    • TheOneCurly
      link
      fedilink
      English
      111 year ago

      If you’ve ever followed the C++ committee discussions you’ll see they put a lot of time and effort into considering legacy code when introducing language changes. For better or worse existing languages are on a trajectory set from their inception that can’t always be easily redirected. New languages are free of this baggage and can wildly experiment.

      • TehPers
        link
        fedilink
        English
        31 year ago

        I wish languages were more willing to release breaking versions, like a C++ v2 or such. That’s not to say languages don’t already have breaking changes between versions (Python comes to mind), but it would allow people to start fresh and clean up obsolete designs and libraries.

        • magic_lobster_party
          link
          fedilink
          51 year ago

          You know the cleaning up probably won’t happen. If some dependency doesn’t work anymore because Python introduced a breaking change, then you stick with the old Python version.

          • thbb
            link
            fedilink
            31 year ago

            Python is actually a good example of this: see the mess that the transition from 2.6 to 3 generated.

            • magic_lobster_party
              link
              fedilink
              2
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Python 3.7 is another good example. The new await and async keyword broke a lot of programs.

    • @kSPvhmTOlwvMd7Y7E
      link
      41 year ago

      Your last question is equivalent to : why there so many math theories? Can’t we just reuse the old ones?

      New language appear as a natural product from research in type theory for ex