|
|
|
|
|
|
by treyd
813 days ago
|
|
|
An isomorphism is a structure preserving 1:1 map between two sets or some other pair of structures. While Java and Kotlin are interoperable (because they both target the JVM), they are not isomorphic for precisely the reasons you described. If it was, then you could do round trip machine translation on the syntax in either direction and have a result that's identical to the original. You can't do that because Kotlin extends Java in nontrivial semantic ways (for a concrete example, see Nothing in the article you linked). Cpp2 isn't trying to be a successor language to C++, the article states that it's trying to present an identical feature set in a new skin where the best practices of modern C++ are more ergonomic without introducing any new functionality. |
|
|
Herb is trying to sell it as not a successor because for now that suits him better.
Because C++ is a general purpose language Herb can deliver a "not a new feature" that is so elaborate in practice you would never write the equivalent C++ by hand, but Herb can insist that since technically it can still be transpiled to C++ it's not a different language... right up until that ceases to suit his agenda.
Under this model WUFFS (a higher performance yet entirely safe language for writing stuff like codecs and compression algorithms) doesn't "introduce any new functionality" compared to C, since the present WUFFS-the-language is transpiled into C. But I think C programmers would be astonished to hear that C is now apparently higher performance than C and is able to guarantee it's entirely safe...