Programming dialects don't seem to get names. I think a pattern of [language-name]-[dominant-principles] might make a good name scheme. Suffixes would then work across languages. Other suffix namespaces could coexist, though I'm not sure what they'd be.
My point wasn't so much about any one program, so much as it was about an invisible programming ethnology. I like when Show HNs say what language they speak; I would like even more if they say how they speak it.
Having name for program dialects would allow prospective users and contributors to gain deep insight about its intended structure, vision, scope, limits, etc, etc, etc, etc from a distance.
It may have seemed narrow focused, but I didn't want my point to be limited to one set of principles, patterns, and libraries, even though I like what actix adds to Rust-std(?), especially since any code spoken in it can itself make, or through some elements factored out be made into, other libraries that then build on or toward another powerful dialect / speaker communities.
My point wasn't so much about any one program, so much as it was about an invisible programming ethnology. I like when Show HNs say what language they speak; I would like even more if they say how they speak it.
Having name for program dialects would allow prospective users and contributors to gain deep insight about its intended structure, vision, scope, limits, etc, etc, etc, etc from a distance.
It may have seemed narrow focused, but I didn't want my point to be limited to one set of principles, patterns, and libraries, even though I like what actix adds to Rust-std(?), especially since any code spoken in it can itself make, or through some elements factored out be made into, other libraries that then build on or toward another powerful dialect / speaker communities.
#hashtag: ethnocodology(?) ..ethnokodikology?