Comments by "Science Daemon" (@sciencedaemon) on "Picking A Language In 2025" video.

  1. Zig is just a C++ pretending it is C.
    59
  2. The blazingly obvious problem is these these noobs don't know functional programming, Lisp well. They are quibbling about this or that Algol type language rather than seeing they are all screwed by their very foundations. Zig is a C++ saying it is a C. It is still crap no matter how you dress it up. There is also the question of the money behind Zig pushing it forward. C++ is a ghastly mess of syntax. C is out for its shortcomings. Rust is another Algol type lang trying to be a better C++ with C-ish things. Clojure is the best language now, despite JVM and lack of low-level facilities.
    7
  3. It is vomit for those of us that understand functional programming, Lisp, etc. Why do you think C++ and many other languages keep stealing ideas from Lisp and FP and then present them as something amazingly new in your Algol type language?
    6
  4. Yes, but it is not modern enough and can be impractical. Clojure is the best we have at the moment, ignoring JVM, low level stuff.
    5
  5. it deserves it. Zig is a C++ saying it is a C.
    4
  6.  @ThePrimeTimeagen  your reply makes me think you do not understand what I wrote, LOL
    3
  7. Noob that doesn't know Lisp.
    2
  8.  @mareksicinski3726  C is faster and (duh) has capabilities. That doesn't mean as much now with multicore processors, etc. Clojure runs on Java and has built-in multicore processing functions and many more easily usable capabilities than nuts & bolts C++.
    2
  9. Barf.
    2
  10.  @Eldarlll  CL being OOP doesn't mean much because OOP does not solve as much as people thought it would back when it was included in CLOS. Clojure has OOP in the form of protocols, a different approach to OOP. You can also extend or inherit from any Java object in Clojure, even private classes of Java itself. You haven't supplied an example that Clojure cannot work on.
    2
  11. Pfft. Get an original language for this, a Lisp. They all steal from Lisp.
    2
  12. Blah
    1
  13.  @ThePrimeTimeagen  aw, hurt your tiny mind's feelings with facts you can't handle. Don't worry you can take a number with all the other people I destroy with truth. If you understood anything you would know to never argue/insult people in the comments. It is a bad look and drives people away from your channel.
    1
  14. They are not the same, although some representation from physics can go into some in CS.
    1
  15.  @katrinabryce  Just use Clojure and operate on a vector or map with functional programming, sequence operations (e.g map, reduce, filter). It is the default behavior.
    1
  16.  @mareksicinski3726  I did. Look at those languages, know them, and it is obvious. I know C/C++ and Zig is supposed to be a better C, but the syntax says it wants to do OOP stuff, albeit in a different way. There is nothing new under the sun with Algol-based languages, except the stuff they steal from Lisp/FP that had it 40 or more years ago. See all those templates, generics, lambdas, and so forth that were introduced into C++ as brand new. Yep all from Lisp and functional programming.
    1
  17.  @streq9199  lol what, another zig fanboy.
    1
  18.  @NoX-512  you actually think that no functional programming language has or can be used to develop systems or are general purpose. LOL
    1
  19.  @OSharraps  yep, it is a pain, tedious. I prefer Clojure, but even python (gasp) is better for not getting bored.
    1
  20. It's a damn mess. Merely adding more stuff to it over time does not make it better. Almost all languages can evolve and be extended with libs. A better example of your ideas is Clojure.
    1
  21.  @videocruncher  you are not telling me anything I do not know. I have been programming for over 30 years. C++ is messy. Go is another try at C/C++. People that understand programming well will always gravitate to Lisps, not Algol-based languages.
    1
  22. Clojurescript.
    1
  23.  @markamber1480  assembly works. Binary works. Just because it works (you get paid) and is levels removed from the metal is no reason to not see the problems.
    1
  24.  @Eldarlll  I never said OOP was idiomatic Clojure, nor are you required to write idiomatic OOP in Clojure. Clojure allows you to do what you want: functional, procedural, OOP.
    1
  25.  @Eldarlll  you haven't said anything.
    1
  26. @ivanhai read up on Lisp. it varies between implementations. For instance, Common Lisp Object system (CLOS) has the Meta Object protocol (MOP).
    1
  27.  @EternalConglomerate  you do realize there are lots of people, articles, out there with opinions that disagree with that, right? That can point out the bad parts of F# readily. I'm not one of them, but I do know if I want FP I'm going to use a Lisp like Clojure, not some microshaft trash ripoff language.
    1