|
|
|
|
|
|
by Udo
4240 days ago
|
|
|
> or is it just being done out of an interest in programming languages That would be enough. I believe more people should be thinking about programming languages - even if it's just for fun or learning. > what this language is trying to provide that isn't already provided by [...] Most languages don't provide things that aren't technically also provided by others. It's more about how they are provided, what the language's strengths are, and how it wants programmers to approach problems. Showing people what your language is all about is harder than it seems at first. Duck could probably do with a more in-depth tutorial and some talking points in order to better inform people about its features. This made me look at the website of my own perpetually unfinished language project, and even though I knew I had to make an effort to showcase the thing in the tutorial section, upon reviewing it now I don't think it was particularly successful. Arguably, there are even some high profile languages that don't do a good enough job explaining what they're about, though website quality has picked up dramatically across the board in recent years. |
|
|
Yes. Having a solid understanding of how languages work makes exploiting particular strengths of any one easier. It makes polyglot approach viable. It makes you less dependent on external tools and support from other people, as you can always roll your own linter, autocompleter or other such things. Being able to debug and modify your language is rather extreme, but very effective measure against some development problems.
It doesn't even need to be that great of a time investment to learn the basics. I see no reason for not doing this if you're a professional programmer. Language design and implementation is a thing that you'll interact with every day working as a programmer. It really makes no sense not to have at least basic grasp of it.