Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site arizona.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!security!genrad!grkermit!masscomp!clyde!ihnp4!arizona!whm
From: whm@arizona.UUCP (Bill Mitchell)
Newsgroups: net.lang
Subject: Language popularity
Message-ID: <6785@arizona.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 13-Dec-83 12:25:32 EST
Article-I.D.: arizona.6785
Posted: Tue Dec 13 12:25:32 1983
Date-Received: Thu, 15-Dec-83 02:02:17 EST
Organization: CS Dept, U of Arizona, Tucson
Lines: 43


	From: andree@uokvax.UUCP
	Newsgroups: net.lang.c
	Subject: Re: RE: Re: great quote about the 'C' la - (nf)
	Date: Sat, 10-Dec-83 20:50:38 MST
	
	...
	
	Final note: Horrowitz (sp?) gave three rules for having a succesfull
	(i.e., popular) language:
	
		1) Write a good, clear book describing the language. The
			emphasis is on writing code, not exact definitions.
		2) Write a compiler for it that at least generates code.
		3) Sell the compiler incredibly cheaply. Better yet, give it
			away.

It seems that Horowitz has missed the most important point: there must
be some need for the language.  There are certainly hundreds of "major"
languages that meet points 2 and 3, and many of those have adequate
documentation available.  However, if a language is going to be successful,
it must fill a need that isn't met by available languages.  If a language
very similar to C, but with some of the blemishes removed, was introduced
today, would it be very popular?  I doubt it.

Programmers need to be motivated to move from one language to another.
Personally, I find many of the new languages to be interesting, but before
I'm going to switch from one language to another, I'm going to need a good
reason.  It appears that many of the popular languages today gained
acceptance because they could do things significantly better than other
languages available at the time of their introduction.  Consider this:
of the languages that are in widespread use today, how many of them were
drastically different from other languages available at the time of their
appearance?  Think about FORTRAN, Lisp, COBOL, APL, C; they were all
departures from what was generally available.  Note also that in many ways,
the new aspects of the languages arose from needs that weren't being met.

So, I propose a new rule:
	The language must fill a niche in the environment it is designed
	 for, and it must be able to displace competitors for that niche.

					Bill Mitchell
					whm.arizona@rand-relay
					{kpno,mcnc,utah-cs}!arizona!whm