Re: We're All Doomed (Programmers, That Is)
Vincent wrote:
>
> In the year 2038, the C programming language will be around 70 years old and
> C++ will be around 60 years old. Programming languages just dont live that
> long
> unless they're virtually completely redesigned for modern times.
I would say that's incorrect. Fortran 77 is stil the de facto Fortran standard
despite Fortran 2003 being the newest standard. Occasionally I'll even run into
Fortran 66 code that I need to work on. The same is true with Cobol, Cobol 2002
is the newest standard but no one uses it instead opting for Cobol-85. We're
seeing the same with C now. K&R C is still used in some places (legacy code only
though, no one really writes new K&R C code anymore) but ANSI C (1989) is the de
facto standard despite C99 being specified. The most up to date C compiler? The
Risc OS C compiler. Microsoft, Borland, and Sybase (Watcom) aren't adding many
C99 features. GNU CC is doing fairly well but still isn't completely compatible.
So unless you use Risc OS (which few people do and most are confined to the UK)
you technically don't program in standard C. Although, GCC and to a lesser extent
Watcom are catching up.
> That means they will be ancient languages that would be older than Fortran and
> Cobol today. Who would still be developing with such old languages? Who would
> still be using software developed with those languages?
Well, I work as a sometimes Fortran programmer and despite inroads made by
Matlab and its ilk Fortran is still the primary scientific programming language.
Also, most companies that already use Cobol continue to use Cobol. In fact, Cobol
is still the most used language for new programming projects despite being
"obsolete". Lisp is still going strong as well and is the backbone of Yahoo!
Store and Orbitz. I guarantee that those languages will still be in use by 2038
as well.
> Besides by 2038 probably only 128 bit computers will be in use. Perhaps even
> some full scale quantum computers as well. This C time function is only a
> problem
> with 32 bit software and computers.
32-bit processors were first introduced in the mid to late 70s and didn't become
ubiquitous until the early to mid 90s. 64-bit processors were introduced in the
early 90s and are just starting to become popular in workstations. So we'll
probably see 64 bit CPUs in wide adoption by 2010 or 2015. This shows a cycle of
20 to 25 years so 128 bit won't become big by at least 2035 or 2040 assuming that
this trend holds and there's a general purpose 128 bit CPU by 2015.
The Euphoria Standard Library project :
http://esl.sourceforge.net/
The Euphoria Standard Library mailing list :
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/esl-discussion
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
