Anders Hejlsberg, Herb Sutter, Erik Meijer, Brian Beckman: Software Composability and the Future of | Going Deep

jsampsonPC
SampsonBlog.com SampsonVideos.com

Charles, why didn't you take advantage of Roundtable for this interview? Smiley

I just started watching...and this lineup looks like it's potentially one of the coolest interviews in a long time Smiley

Charles
Welcome Change

jsampsonPC wrote:
Charles, why didn't you take advantage of Roundtable for this interview? I just started watching...and this lineup looks like it's potentially one of the coolest interviews in a long time

It's one of the best I've been a part of... Re RoundTable: I'm not too fond of the quality it produces today and I think a camera works fine for this. Robert Hess will be innovating the RoundTable format. I want that to be his signature. I'll stick with OldSchool.

C

jsampsonPC
SampsonBlog.com SampsonVideos.com

Sounds good man! Your interviews definitely aren't lacking! Keep up the great work.

RichardRudek
So what do you expect for nothin'... :P

I think the reason why you had compiler developers saying that "F# was their favourite dynamic language" is more due to an issue of your refined (limited) definition of "dynamic", in this context. ie A question that (mischievously ?) sets up the answerer to fail your implicit, scope-limited defintion... [A]

This kinda reminds me of some experients that were done on children of varying ages when asked "which of these two straws is taller". The children were individually sat down at a table with two identical straws (length, colour, etc). However, one of the straws was moved further away. The three year olds (I'm not actually sure of this age, but it'll do) always selected the straw furthest away. In other words, the problem was actually a mismatch between the experience of the questioner and answerer. The questioner's definition of "taller" was more refined than the child's. However, once those children had been shown what was actually meant by the question, they moved the straws next to each other, and (effectively) answered "they are both the same".

PS: Hey, I couldn't resist given Anders' little dig about Academics and functional programming... Smiley

REALLY good interview !

Avalonic

very nice, discussions on language compilers and the CLR infrastructure are always an interesting topic to follow.

I love the direction C# is heading, adding functional constructs and type inference is a good thing, as was delegates with closures.
It gives a little more scripting language feel without sacrificing type safety etc.

One thing I'd like to see in the future is better integration of WPF/XAML related features like routed events and dependency properties into the compilers or CLR.

footballism
Another Paradigm Shift!

Actually "weak delegate" is the thing which I hope can be built into CLR3.0

Sheva.

SecretSoftware
Code to live, but Live to code.

footballism wrote:
Actually "weak delegate" is the thing which I hope can be built into CLR3.0

Sheva.

Agreed too.

THis video is very cool. The topics answer some good questions, although other stuff could have been answered there.

On the whole its a very good interview. (Now if we could have had the VB team there too (Amanda Silver and the others) it would have been even better.

I hope this gets repeated again, because its like a dream come true for alot of people including me, for all the lead devs in the languages discussing the future and the existing problems that devs face today and how to solve these.

I agree that Locks in threads are very limiting and this whole model must be gone and replaced with a new multi-threading sub-model, where things are faster without the problems surrounding locks.

Linq is I think the best thing that happened to .NET in quite a while, and its adoption in the .NET would make .NEt even more attractive. I am a big fan of Linq because it makes programming fun and more productive on the whole.

If we can only find a way to emplement a zero-tolerance policy on tampering with MSIL as it goes form dev machine to users machine to CLR, I would be a very happy .NET developer and I think alot of people who depend on .NET to develop would be happier too.

All I can say, keep the good stuff coming!

Onward!!!