|
Article Publishing
|
~ is the ultimate compiler one that has no options |
Every time one programming language tries to communicate or deal with another programming language, the programmer is scared shitless that something will not be compatible: a struct in C will not match up to the record alignment in Delphi.
Is the ultimate programming language, one that has no options where nothing can be aligned a certain way, no tweaks can be done? As when you take out the tweaking and options, you now have a standard language that does not fuck with things: it's just one thing that does one thing: compiles code the same way.
This is kind of a silly way of saying "Fuck all this non standard shit" and trying to group all programmers into one bucket and not letting them have any other buckets of goodies to fuck with: no knobs to twiddle, just one good bucket with no options, bells, or whistles.
Or another example is whether or not your integer, will match up to the integer of another language, which may be 32 bit whereas yours is 64. Is the ultimate programming system, one which there is no such thing as a 32 bit or 64 bit integer, but a computer that has an integer that goes to infinity? therefore compatibility is not an issue: all integers are infinite, and therefore as soon as you call a function that requires an integer, you know you are using the correct integer, because it is an integer of the universe itself, the universal computer that theoretically goes to infinity.
How many times has some perfect application, coded perfectly, not worked, because of some obscure compiler switch or misaligned record, or integer incompatibility across DLL's? Like a record that wasn't packed or aligned properly or that int32 that you meant to be an int64, or you didn't even mean to - but it should have been, for some undefined reason that you aren't sure of.
Contrarian position: Defining certain things as fixed such as int32 (instead of ideal infinity integer) can at least restrict the program from going into a loop to infinity; at least it stops at max value of integer with possible a range check error and the loop breaks. Joke: if the program or universe was any good, why would you want an infinite loop to break anyway? You don't want a range check error in a good loop, you want it to continue. You'd be in heaven and need an integer that goes to infinity to keep the loop going anyway, but, you could also just use a While loop that never exits.
More contrarian positions: compiler switches are useful, for tweaking things, changing things massively with a single switch (optimizations) and leaving the code base the same. I.e. take a working code base that is slow, put on a switch, and all of a sudden it is fast, with no changes to the code: just a compiler switch. But that's also it's biggest flaw: i.e. this is a double edged sword. As much as we love a compiler with all sorts of options, there is this dream going about of "a single programming language, and a single computer". Possibly the universe itself: which, is probably not that - because we know for a fact that this universe is a proven piece of shit full of morons, who, at this point I say Fuck you, and fag off.
|
|