Oskar45 wrote:
Of course, any Turing-complete language is theoretically exactly as powerful as any other Turing-complete language
Emphasis on
theoretically!
In practice that's irrelevant. I mean do you really want to write GUI apps or a data base engine in brainf**k?
Oskar45 wrote:
although some Turing-complete languages are simply too tedious for anything practical
Right but it goes much further than that. Languages are bound to platforms and types of tasks a lot more than people realize because most people only have experience with one platform or a bunch of platforms that are essentially very similar from the programmer's point of view. Even if a language runs on multiple platforms and OS it is often more useful on some combinations of platforms and OS than others, mostly because the type of work across those platforms and OS differs so much.
Oskar45 wrote:
Anyway, I trust everyone on here is fluent in C/C++ [the current lingua franca of programming?]
Nope and I dispute those languages are the currrent lingua franca of programming unless you are talking about *NIX based computing. In my work nobody uses those except maybe for a little of the UI and on the platform I work with nobody use those languages even for applications since domain specific languages and libraries were available before C and are now entrenched and C/C++ are still not supported very well.
Oskar45 wrote:
Now, should you desire to pick up a new programming language - what would it be?
I know a bunch of languages that aren't used very much now but my favorite is z/Arch assembler. Assembler is bound very much to an OS *and* the hardware platform. So I'm looking for a platform I like and an OS I like and a language I like and I haven't found the sweet spot yet (other than the one I already work on). That should be a different spin on your question, since I assume everyone else here knows and loves UNIX and it's just a matter of what language that's useful on UNIX would you like to learn. Sigh, you guys have it so easy