Timeline for Does it hurt to learn bits of many programming languages?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 7, 2014 at 15:01 | history | made wiki | Post Made Community Wiki by Spidey | ||
| Jan 14, 2012 at 14:37 | vote | accept | CommunityBot | ||
| Jan 6, 2012 at 18:52 | comment | added | brian | @SK-logic Well, you still had to learn every language feature (and the implementation on at least 1 platform) to write a compiler. If you have no memory retention or suffer a massive head wound after you write the compiler then of course you might not "know" it afterwards :) | |
| Jan 6, 2012 at 8:01 | comment | added | SK-logic | @brian, trust me, you do not have to know the language in order to be able to implement its compiler. You can just translate the spec into a code blindly. But as a result of doing so you'll learn at least some basics of the language - that's why it is my preferred way of learning the new languages. | |
| Dec 31, 2011 at 2:29 | comment | added | Jörg W Mittag | in that group, even though he actually designed Java Generics (together with Phil Wadler, of course). Although, to be fair, wildcards were added to his design without his consent, in fact, against his express dissent. | |
| Dec 31, 2011 at 2:20 | comment | added | Jörg W Mittag | I don't think even the people who write C++ compilers understand C++. Individually, I mean. Obviously collectively, they have to somehow understand the entire language, but I don't think that there is a single person on this planet who understands all of it. In fact, the committee members are usually quite clear about the fact that they all understand only their own area of expertise. Similarly in Java: Martin Odersky recently said that he believes there are only 3 people in the world who understand wildcards. And from the tone of the e-mail I got the impression that he did not include himself | |
| Dec 30, 2011 at 22:39 | comment | added | jmoreno | Given that compilers and interpreters have bugs, I don't think it's humanly possible to get to 10 for most languages. | |
| Dec 30, 2011 at 22:04 | comment | added | user606723 | Further, most software that we deal with is systems programming. With this, 90% of our operations is interfacing with various APIs and then tying them together to get our desired functionality. C/C++,java,python,perl, etc. are all good at this. They also compile and perform well. Lisp, prolog, caml, fortran (And a ton I don't know) have their uses. | |
| Dec 30, 2011 at 21:57 | comment | added | user606723 | I like this answer, except it's less "what you like", and it's more "the right tool for the job". No one should be using the same language to solve every problem. That would make a bad software developer. Each language and paradigms have pros and cons. | |
| Dec 30, 2011 at 18:37 | history | answered | brian | CC BY-SA 3.0 |