[ProgSoc] Progsoc debate?

Myles Byrne myles at myles.id.au
Mon Apr 7 23:20:13 EST 2008


On Sun, Apr 6, 2008 at 9:59 PM, Nathan de Vries <nathan at atnan.com> wrote:
> On 06/04/2008, at 12:49 PM, Thomas Given-Wilson wrote:
>  > what would you like to see a debate on (probably between industry
>  > and academia)?
>
>  I'll seed the discussion with two from John at the AGM, and one from
>  prior list debating [1]:
>
>    * REST vs. SOAP (not SOA, like what I thought I heard him say)
>    * Functional languages vs. functional languages with limited/no
>  side effects (real world vs. academic)
>    * Declarative vs. imperative languages with regards to their
>  ability to be Turing-complete

Along those lines but maybe a bit broader ... how about:

"Text as an interface" vs "Stabilize the platform, advance the tools"

Those are crappy names but what I'm trying to describe is the growing
rift between the python/ruby/perl camp who employ parsing & runtime
tricks to shorten their line-count - sometimes creating new mini
languages (or dialects of the original language) - and the Java/C#
camp who favor a less malleable runtime and more explicit syntax so
they can do cool stuff at the tool level with static analysis of the
code.

I personally don't get how Java guys put up with "public static final
..." but I've met some really good developers who think it's insane to
drop someone into a codebase where method names don't complete (and
can therefore be misspelled or the wrong argument signature can be
used) and you can't just double-click around to browse the api.

Also the choice of topic is probably less important that the choice of
contestants. Does progsoc arrangement also mean selecting the
contestants?

-- Myles


More information about the Progsoc mailing list