|
|
|
|
|
by jblow
4229 days ago
|
|
It is cute, but you can't design a language for toy problems or you run into problems with bigger software. I kind of stopped reading here: "Since it is declarative code, update returns a new world w2 instead of merely modifying w1. The funny thing is, just by doing this our code becomes 200% better. For example, you can now modify the code to store all world states in a list!" Uh huh. Try doing that with a nontrivial game that needs to be performant, and let me know how that works out. |
|
But I think one has a responsibility not to try and sell one's project as something it's not, which especially means being careful with claims. I know this is sometimes hard because a lot of language design stuff comes from the academic community which notoriously overclaims (because it is their job to overclaim), and it is easy for that culture to rub off.
But if you are going to say something like "just by doing this our code becomes 200% better", with a straight face, about something that most practitioners know is going to be terrible in most cases without a tremendous amount of additional work and solving of unsolved problems (solution not shown), you're just telling the reader that they can't take you seriously. It's a bad thing to do.