Inspired by Mr. KrestenKrab, I feel obligated to comment on Google’s language development activities.
Publicly they’ve talked about their internal tooling capabilities when working with source code (bytecode inspection, singleton detection, the ability to focus unit tests on potentially impacted code based on what lines were changed in a file / diff).
Unfortunately I don’t have all the references handy, but if you pay close attention to what google is doing, you begin to see that they are most definitely on the “other side” of the bell curve from most people in their ability to navel-gaze at their product code.
There are a lot of people who are slamming google and I can’t tell if it’s because they think it’s the cool thing to do, or they don’t understand what they’re doing, or maybe it’s because they are afraid of change?
I can’t tell what it is, but from my perspective, Google’s moves are interesting and fairly transparent.
You might also have noticed that each of Go and Dart have “shipped” with online / live compilers exposed to the internet, pretty much from day one. That speaks volumes to their confidence in their ability to lock down the code for use with untrusted input.
Go and Dart both appear to be fairly pragmatic languages, focused on making it easier to write correct programs.
From the Go FAQ:
Go is an attempt to combine the ease of programming of an interpreted, dynamically typed language with the efficiency and safety of a statically typed, compiled language. It also aims to be modern, with support for networked and multicore computing. Finally, it is intended to be fast: it should take at most a few seconds to build a large executable on a single computer. To meet these goals required addressing a number of linguistic issues: an expressive but lightweight type system; concurrency and garbage collection; rigid dependency specification; and so on. These cannot be addressed well by libraries or tools; a new language was called for.
From the Dart FAQ:
Create a structured yet flexible programming language for the web.
Make Dart feel familiar and natural to programmers and thus easy to learn.
So… why have Go and Dart “leaked” from the lab into the real world?
This is the interesting part of the Google story. In my day job, I regularly rail on people for inventing dumb libraries, NIH and the like. Right now I’m using a unit test library for perl that is in use nowhere else outside of my company.
The question I always ask: “Can I buy a book on it?” Followed immediately by: “Why is this different than what the blogs are telling me to do?” and “How long would it take somebody to ramp up if I hired them off the street?”
Sometimes there is a good reason, but more often there aren’t good answers to those questions.
So Google’s a smart company, and I’m a smart guy. That means that Google has some of those same concerns. Even if the new languages that Google has put together are materially better than the other languages out there, it still doesn’t help Google until outside people start using them.
They’ve already pushed Guice, GWT, their Java / C development standards, their testing blog, map reduce,
everythingmany things they’ve learned internally they’re trying to share with the outside world so that it isn’t quite as big of a shock when fresh meat enters the grind.
If you look at how the existing programming languages were made, they each grew on a strong base (C++ on C. Java on C++. PHP on Perl [heh]. Python on Basic.) and tried to make incremental improvements yet be fundamentally “better” taking into account the shared experience that only real-world use can give.
I think that Google is following in the same tradition, and given their internal experiences, only a fool would dismiss it out of hand.
It was (kindof?) a stroke of genius when Yahoo! ditched their internal template system for PHP. I’m sure it had a profoundly positive impact on their hiring productivity “Oh, you know the most popular web scripting language? Good, that’s the one we use.”
In the same way, if we assume that Go and Dart are in fact materially improved languages (especially if they are materially better inside of Google), it is in Google’s vested interest to get as many people as possible using it. The more someone knows before joining a company, the lower their training costs are, the higher their productivity.
Their focus with these languages (at least with Go) appear to be laser-like on reliability, ease of programmer use, and ease of inspection / whole program manipulation.
I think that the leaked memo for Dart forced Google’s hand to get something out there quicker than they really wanted. I also think that looking at Dart briefly it would benefit from similar “bold changes while in flight” as they have made to Go based on community feedback (the basic one for Dart they’ve screwed up is not tagging functions with a simple keyword- “def / sub / func / function” so you can grep for things).
Go has been out for approximately two years (November 2009) and they are closing in on their own “Go 1.0” release and have made significant changes to the language during that process.
It will probably be a while before Dart reaches anywhere near the same relevance as “Go” has (which is to say: not that much outside of Google), but I have high hopes, especially if they steward the project well.
It is not surprising that Google has released these languages. As a matter of fact, they are just following with the tradition of corporations releasing languages they’ve invented and found useful (Erlang=>Ericcson, C=>Bell Labs, Java=>Sun, lots more programming language origins) but what is surprsing is that there are now so few Universities involved in advancing the state of the art in programming.
I wonder if we are entering a “new era” of Computer Science where pragmatism trumps expressing algorithms, or if they have somehow (necessarily) merged into one but now with corporations driving the bus.