[Info-vax] DCL Integer Overflow

[IanD]

On Wednesday, July 5, 2017 at 10:04:02 AM UTC+10, Arne Vajhøj wrote:

<snip>

> Relative pure FP languages does not seem to have much traction.
> 

For pure scripting, backend functional languages are not being used a lot for scripting, that is true

But the bi-class of them in scripting terms is the other ugly sister, frontend Functional languages like Elixir, they are used more for pure scripting

But yes, adoption is slow but as systems grow in complexity and integration, 'side-effects' are going to become more and more unwelcome as they directly relate to lost revenue / brand damage, so any programming / scripting paradigm that eliminates / reduce these impacts, I think will only grow in importance. Functional helps fits that bill IMO

> OOP languages with lots of FP features seems to have some traction.
> 

Python can be bent to appear to be functional but it's a rough fit (so I've read. I've read many a religious debate as to why Python is not a pure functional language and any attempt to claim that it is is considered sacrilege by some!)

Lipstick on a Pig doesn't fix a lack of inherent nature. When complexity rises and scale increases, attributes that functional languages have, by nature, come into their own.
Just as procedural languages are perfectly valid in certain contexts and OO comes to the rescue in particular ways that procedural languages fall short on, so functional languages cover for the shortfall where procedural and OO have a tough time shining in. Horses for courses. 

Ericsson developed Erlang specifically to cater for distributed complex environments, they saw the need for a functional programming language where existing solutions fell short in

> New languages like Scala and F#.
> 
> And additions to older languages like C# and Java.
> 

I think it's their base momentum that drags them forward although there's a lot of love out there for C# and a growing hatred for Java, at least under Oracle

> But I don't think this stuff is particular important for
> scripting.
> 
> Arne

I guess it's going to depend on what horse VSI back

Do they target mainstream now or go with something that's starting to show promise on the growth curve? How far forward looking are they wanting to be (or need to be to attract attention / relevance by future adopters). 

The best attitude I think is to realise that IT is evolving, there is no steady state. Whatever VMS adopts today will at some point need to be replaced, enhanced, modified, reworked and all of the above. This attitude is far more important to instill into the minds of VMS advocates than any language picked. The lack of this style of thinking IMO is partly what caused the near death of VMS

At some point in time (and there's sign's of the push for it already), the world will want to go beyond the von neumann architecture too but that's getting way out there!

I just did a Google around and had a glance at things like Quil and QCL and it did my head in :-)  (I chuckled however that someone's created pyQuil, is there anything a Pythonester will not try and push Python into)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_programming

But now this is getting way off topic and way beyond where VMS is or will be even in the next 10+ years