Published on October 26, 2017 by Microsoft Research
Want create site? Find Free WordPress Themes and plugins.

Modern society is built on software platforms that encompass a great deal of our lives. While this is well known, software is invented by people and this comes at considerable cost. Notably, approximately $331.7 billion are paid, in the U.S. alone, in wages every year for this purpose. Generally, developers in industry use programming languages to create their software, but there exists significant dispersion in the designs of competing language products. In some cases, this dispersion leads to trivial design inconsistencies (e.g., the meaning of the symbol +), while in other cases the approaches are radically different. Studies in the literature show that some of the broader debates, like the classic ones on static vs. dynamic typing or competing syntactic designs, provide consistent and replicable results in regard to their human factors impacts. For example, programmers can generally write correct programs more quickly using static typing than dynamic for reasons that are now known. In this talk, we will discuss three facets of language design dispersion, sometimes colloquially referred to as the “programming language wars.” First, we will flesh out the broader impacts inventing software has on society, including its cost to industry, education, and government. Second, recent evidence has shown that even research scholars are not gathering replicable and reliable data on the problem. Finally, we will give an overview of the facts now known about competing alternatives (e.g., types, syntax, compiler error design, lambdas). 

See more on this video at

Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games and apps.

Leave a Reply

2 Comments on "The Programming Language Wars"

Notify of

Kenichi Mori
Kenichi Mori
22 days 12 hours ago

Define language HASKELL.

22 days 14 hours ago
The best way to 'work with this' ( fix it) seems to not create yet another Language but instead create a 'Programming Framework'.Program's Source Code would be read into the Editor and another program (ran in the background) would attempt an automatic conversation to a few different Languages; the compiled result compared and tested for equality.The Editor would also support editing and initial creation (writing) of a Program in a few Languages (semi)-simultaneously.This would triple the effort and require smarter Programmers but it would avoid 'Language Obsolescence', programming errors, improve readability by more people (the reader of the Source doesn't… Read more »