HN user

vpkaihla

66 karma
Posts0
Comments40
View on HN
No posts found.

Flatly, re-writing a several decade's old, matured codebase in today's flavor-of-the-week language is not a good idea. It's a waste of time and effort.

That's the sort of thinking we'd benefit from having less. Legacy is a terrible burden.

No, it's not nonsense. The things you listed in there are incremental fixes, not fundamental.

http://php.net/manual/en/language.types.type-juggling.php

How would you fix this without breaking most PHP code out there?

How would you fix ==, > and < behaviour without breaking most PHP code out there?

How would you fix Unicode without breaking most PHP code out there?

If PHP fixed things like this, it would be a decent programming language, but it would also break a lot of things. Kinda of like what python3 did, only that it didn't have to break quite so much, since python2 was already pretty decent.

You don't understand. To fix problems like python3 did, you have to break older code.

Php7 did nothing like that, that's why the "porting" process was so light. But it also means it didn't fix any of the big things.

The reason for that is that python2=>3 fixed several fundamental problems. 5.6 => 7 is just a incremental upgrade, whatever the version numbering tells you. Most of the PHP problems are still there.

But why improve performance by switching to a language that's well suited to the task at hand when you can do it by switching to a language that's hip?

Because your question is loaded?

  - In the modern world, people are afraid of XML
      - 95% of people still don't understand XML namespaces
I guess that's one way of saying that something is too complicated :)
Announcing Rust 1.6 11 years ago

Like all things in life, higher abstraction level of Haskell is not free. The price is more complex language (which many people don't have the capacity to properly learn) and less predictable runtime behaviour.

Announcing Rust 1.6 11 years ago

If you think any young language can be as complicated as C++, you're trying to be cute or do not actually know how complicated C++ actually is.

Two Weeks of Rust 11 years ago

Rust is a young language and I would be pleasantly surprised to see code written today still compile in five years.

Without changes to the code? Has there even been a language where that has been true?

As if with "modern" languages you would be safer. Poor new delusional kids.

That's a rather amazing quip. How would I, in my mid-thirties, accidentally write a buffer overflow in Haskell or Rust?

Node is javascript. You may want to run the same code on client and server, and it's simpler than compiling Rust to JS.

What would be the reason to do that?