It would be nice if the language examples were in C#..I guess you could ask why I am asking to play to the audience in a language that they already know, but normally "general acceptance" is the best way to get the point across.
I don't think you could do the same thing using a Worker Role and not a "Web Role for WCF Service", since for some strange reason you can't use port 80 for self-hosting WCF in a WorkerRole.
Go ahead and try to self host a WebHttpBinding Endpoint on a WorkerRole, then go and try it in a "Web Role for WCF Service" and you will see what I mean. The most interesting thing is that if you use any none Microsoft process on port 80 in a Worker Role,
such as you did in your with your Mongoose server example, it works..
I totally agree, but the CCR is special in the list that you present since if you look beyond the CCR, in either the MSRS or DSS/CCR Toolkit, you will find a very nice VPL IDE that really nails down the graphical ideas of FBP..
Too bad that all this goodness from "BigTop" just slipped past most of the .NET world..
I think the language style that you are referring to is akin to the Flow-Based Programming languages of component processes. Since FBP dates back to the 1970's it would seem to backup Al_'s assertion that what we think are new programming languages are just
nice facades on older ideas... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow-based_programming
Yes, I agree with you that Dijkstra liked streamlining notation.
In his 5th argument he was talking about language notation and the limitations of the human mind. If you reread it I think you will find he was stressing modesty and a "less is more" attitude toward manageability (i.e. readability) of programming languages.
If you read that paragraph you will see this text.
"Another lesson we should have learned from the recent past is that the development of "richer" or "more powerful" programming languages was a mistake in the sense that these baroque monstrosities, these conglomerations of idiosyncrasies, are really
unmanageable, both mechanically and mentally. I see a great future for very systematic and very modest programming languages. "
Anyway, all I was saying is that using tricks and trying to save every last character even for "elegance" might lead a programmer down the wrong path if it is non-systematic and eccentric.
"The analysis of the influence that programming languages have on the thinking habits of its users, and the recognition that, by now, brainpower is by far our scarcest resource, they together give us a new collection of yardsticks for comparing the relative
merits of various programming languages. The competent programmer is fully aware of the strictly limited size of his own skull; therefore he approaches the programming task in full humility, and among other things he avoids clever tricks like the plague."
Subcultures that use tricks don't understand the value of clarity for those that read their code.