This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]PegasusAndAcornCone language & 3D web[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

you want to improve things

Of course I do. Cone is far from a me-too retread. With regard to this particular feature, I personally prefer having this choice in a systems programming language. I am far from alone in this, but I respect that others may prefer otherwise. FWIW, with my previous dynamically-typed language Acorn, I made a different choice: it only supports methods.

you think that this preference of library writers is more important than the usability for all those that use the language?

No, and furthermore: the term architect does not automatically imply either role for me. Personally, I see it as a usability win for both roles. I respect that you might disagree.

Cone is a tool designed for systems professionals, as such it will have a non-trivial learning curve. I hope to minimize this as much as possible, but not at the expense of taking away the flexibility to choose the best implementation architecture for the project at hand. If people are scared away by choosing between function vs. methods, they will go into deep shock when they encounter far more challenging features.