The Hundred-Year Language

I consider the approach that the article took on the programming languages evolution was quite interesting. From comparing it to an actual language spoken by humanity, to a living being and approaching on the segments that directly affect that evolution, it was a complete review.

I agree that over the year, what we wanted is to reduce the amount of written code and axioms and that is something that could not be possible with the available hardware before. For example, I consider python my favorite programming language because it may seem that it has a library for almost everything, its simple and does not require a lot of statements. On the other hand, when I first learned to program in C, I suffered for a month or so since even strings do not exist. I agree that sometimes programmer time is more important than computer type, since computers still need to be told exactly what to do and we do not have the resources or processing power that a computer has. This last idea I had not thought it to be a goal in programming language evolution.

Now, I consider parallel programming to be something more important than the credit it receives from Graham. I think that since it started, it has slowly gotten into our programs and apps skins to become useful and on some applications necessary for the program to work. From the time we save by making some parts parallel, to the usefulness that it shows in servers, parallel programming has progressed more than he thought. But I still see as something slow the advancements we are having in that area and how it will gain territory.

As for how languages will evolve there is still much left to see I think and I hope that his opinion about the waste of resources that we will made is not right and we find a way to have both: a language that does not require a lot of lines, words and axioms to write and that takes advantage of the resources it is running.