[cap-talk] Specs for our 'ideal' language?

[David Barbour]

On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 12:42 AM, Rob Meijer <capibara at xs4all.nl> wrote:
> In my view, as long as automatic GC (in memory safe languages like Java)
> only handles memory correctly while explicit deletion in non memory safe
> languages , while being potentially problematic for memory, can be used to
> handle non memory resources  better, there unfortunately is competition.

As noted by Ben earlier, there is little need for these resources to
be coupled.

As noted by me earlier, explicit 'allocation' and 'freeing' of
non-memory resources is itself a language-design error in the face of
neat features such as persistence (which is really just a specific
form of 'disruption tolerance'), automatic distribution for
resilience, and performance. That is, I feel you're attempting to
address symptoms of a language-design without first justifying why the
problem must exist - at least at the user layer - in the first place.

Why must this resource micro-management be a problem under your
'ideal' language? It certainly has no place in mine!