- #NIM PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE LIST COMPREHENSIONS HOW TO#
- #NIM PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE LIST COMPREHENSIONS UPDATE#
- #NIM PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE LIST COMPREHENSIONS PORTABLE#
- #NIM PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE LIST COMPREHENSIONS CODE#
It's compilation unit with circular includes and dependencies can become a bit tricky and overwhelming especially on large scale production applications and programs.
#NIM PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE LIST COMPREHENSIONS HOW TO#
Compiler and Linker errors and warnings can be a bit cryptic or even misleading if you don't understand how to properly debug source code. Some of its shortcomings but are improving with time, it has a moderate to challenging syntax especially when templates become involved. When done correctly it is very proficient in performance and or memory footprint depending on architect, platform, compiler and compiler optimization flags you are using. With its constructor models, RAII is very powerful. It is strongly typed so it is type dependent. Some of its strengths, you can manage your own memory modules.
It is a challenge to learn all of its caveats. Is the language easy to learn and use? Depends on the person.
#NIM PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE LIST COMPREHENSIONS CODE#
Want to write code using only lambdas? Sure can. Want to write code that is macro based? Sure can. Want to write code at the metal level? With asm blocks you sure can. Want to write code in a generic or templated way? Sure can. Want to write code in an object oriented way? Sure can. Want to write code in a functional way? Sure can. Want to write code in a procedural way? Sure can. C++ is more than just a language and regardless of which compiler and or tool set you are using, the standard describes the virtual machine that you are giving instructions to.
#NIM PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE LIST COMPREHENSIONS PORTABLE#
However, what makes it so great is the vast amount of libraries that are out there, and it's overall methodology of being a strongly typed, portable and high performance language. You have to manage your memory, pointers, and object lifetimes manually. Even if you do know what your doing, you can still shoot your neighbor in the foot. It'll let you shoot yourself in the foot if you don't know what you're doing. JS has a bright future ahead for it and no amount of whining is going to change that. This is largely thanks to transpilers like Babel.js, bundlers like Webpack, the integration of NPM for use on the frontend, and library developers taking the time to make their stuff available in either the browser or Node.js as appropriate. JS is so advanced and contains so many libraries and tooling at this point that development on the frontend is nearly indistinguishable from development on the backend. It is regularly improved and updated, it tracks the latest version of ECMAScript available, and it absorbed a lot of important features from languages like TypeScript into itself (this is what ultimately makes TypeScript redundant, since TypeScript has been reduced to just JS with types rather than a really modern version of JS). Promises eased the pain a good bit and async/await eliminated the pain entirely. Unfortunately, in 2011 that was still the era of bad JS, so although people began to adopt it, it wasn't pleasant to work with. In 2011 we got JS on the backend in the form of Node.js. Although WebAssembly is only 4 years old, it's already supported in 95% of browsers. If you need evidence that this is working well, just look how quickly WebAssembly is being adopted.
#NIM PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE LIST COMPREHENSIONS UPDATE#
We also have older browsers that only run old JS being EOL'd, browser vendors are building in auto updating, and everything is falling into place to set us up to easily update or patch client side scripting technologies. Fast forward to 2015, which is the modern JS era meaning ES6 and beyond, we now have nice JS.
This worked really well for a long time and continues to work well today. We began to think of JS as the assembly language of the web, instead of a source language. Thus was the advent of CoffeeScript, LiveScript, Elm, TypeScript, Dart, and many other minor ones. So, how did we grapple with the fact that we had this language in the browser that was super old and can't be updated? Easy, create modern languages that could be transpiled to old JS. Nearly every other language has the luxury of just downloading the latest version, but not JS (in the browser). If Python 1.6 was all that was available in 2015 even though Python 3.x was out, people would be making the same claims of "Python is shit". During the browser wars, Python 1.6 was the latest version out. To put this in perspective, imagine Python was the choice for browser development. It was iterated on for a few years and then basically frozen from 1999-2015. The entire language was created in 10 days in the middle of the browser wars in the 90s. Tons of JS hate in the comments which appear to be largely from people that have no understanding or appreciation for the language, what it had to endure to get here, and the unique challenges with being the ubiquitous language of the web.
0 kommentar(er)
