2,317 karma · joined April 1, 2011
She did. She is one of our species' great poets.
I wrote: It has a garbage collector and goroutines, so clearly it is not trying to be a systems programming language.
Then ... I saw that it does indeed pitch itself as a systems programming language. So, I guess you both are right.
If Gossamer were to drop that claim, then I'd say it looks impressive to me. I have often wanted this particular mix of language features.
That claim seems reasonable. I have zero knowledge of the economics of launching and maintaining satellites though.
The shrinking that property based testing does when it finds an issue is kind of what we need for specs/context.
So avoiding that would mean a server can handle more traffic before running into limits based on thread count.
So much less hassle, lower activation energy needed than with MyFitnessPal.
I think complex systems will still turn into a big ball of mud and AI agents will get just as bogged down as humans when dealing with it. And even though re-build from scratch is cheaper than ever, it can't possibly be done cheaply while also remembering the millions+ of specific characteristics that users will have come to rely on.
Maybe if you pushed spec-driven development to the absolute extreme, but i don't think pushing it that far is easy/cheap. Just as the effort to go from 90% unit test coverage to 100% is hard and possibly not worth it, I expect a similar barrier around extreme spec-driven.
Clarification: I'm advocating clean code in the generic sense, not Uncle Bob's definition.
I mean, "tapestry" is a great word for something that is interconnected. Why not use it?
I don't quite follow but I'd love to hear more about that.