From memory (not very reliable but I'm not going to rewatch hours of video to find sources), Aaron said that when he asked around about working on a nano-pass compiler as a PhD thesis, nobody would take him seriously because it was believed to be impossible to do in a performant way. And he has done it, with this style of code. An world first. And it worked out orders of magnitude faster and less memory and less code than a comparable compiler written in Scheme (which Aaron is pretty good with - he used to be involved in the Scheme R5RS and R6RS standards committees).
He's also built the world's first APL compiler which runs on a GPU and outputs GPU code.
> - Brags about using Notepad instead of the fancy IDEs that us weak-minded plebians use
One of his points is that he's convinced programming as an industry went wrong by sidelining array languages, and we shouldn't need to be writing so much code to get things done. It's not so much bragging about using Notepad, as making a point that a) Notepad is enough for a complex piece of code, b) IDEs can't help much with tacit array code because there isn't tons of boilerplate to autocomplete, and c) concentrating on the code is easier without a lot of distractions.
> - Brags about how he can understand his own code. We can all understand our own code. Good code is understandable by others.
Another one of his points is that people who have not learned traditional programming find array-based programming much easier to pick up. And that's aside from the usual discussions here where you're basically saying "Brags about understanding Chinese. We can all understand our own native language, Good writing is written in English". Other people have contributed pull requests to co-dfns (apparently).
> - Brags about how easily he understands his giant ball of overly messy code
Given your previous criticism is that it's "not understandable", emphasising how it not only is understandable it's quite easy to understand, seems like a reasonable rebuttal for him to make. Apparently he's damned if he does, and damned if he doesn't.
> - (2- letter variables in the name of "semantic density")
That is the array style; his compiler is tacit (no variables) as much as he can make it, which means the few variables which are left are much easier to keep track of in memory. Regardless of that, there's a big gap between languages where people write 'k[i]=m[j]uv' and languages where people write 'pyramidPointVector[pyramidPointVectorOffset]=adjustedShadowMaskBools[rowAlignmentCounter]...' or whatever.
> - Uses an obscure (in the modern era) outdated language like some Cinema aficionado who refuses to watch movies in color like all those plebians
But also like someone who uses any highly specific tool for experts instead of the standard thing an ordinary person might find at Walmart.
> Another one of his points is that people who have not learned traditional programming find array-based programming much easier to pick up.
I have had the same experience when teaching SQL.
I feel like it is difficult for people who have worked with imperative languages to grasp, while people who come from the Excel school (e.g. business people or researchers) actually enjoy it and may even pick it up faster.
I believe SQL and array languages have this and probably much more in common. I am probably out of my league here, but I think I'd call SQL a set language rather than array language. But feels like they are related.
He's also built the world's first APL compiler which runs on a GPU and outputs GPU code.
> - Brags about using Notepad instead of the fancy IDEs that us weak-minded plebians use
One of his points is that he's convinced programming as an industry went wrong by sidelining array languages, and we shouldn't need to be writing so much code to get things done. It's not so much bragging about using Notepad, as making a point that a) Notepad is enough for a complex piece of code, b) IDEs can't help much with tacit array code because there isn't tons of boilerplate to autocomplete, and c) concentrating on the code is easier without a lot of distractions.
> - Brags about how he can understand his own code. We can all understand our own code. Good code is understandable by others.
Another one of his points is that people who have not learned traditional programming find array-based programming much easier to pick up. And that's aside from the usual discussions here where you're basically saying "Brags about understanding Chinese. We can all understand our own native language, Good writing is written in English". Other people have contributed pull requests to co-dfns (apparently).
> - Brags about how easily he understands his giant ball of overly messy code
Given your previous criticism is that it's "not understandable", emphasising how it not only is understandable it's quite easy to understand, seems like a reasonable rebuttal for him to make. Apparently he's damned if he does, and damned if he doesn't.
> - (2- letter variables in the name of "semantic density")
That is the array style; his compiler is tacit (no variables) as much as he can make it, which means the few variables which are left are much easier to keep track of in memory. Regardless of that, there's a big gap between languages where people write 'k[i]=m[j]uv' and languages where people write 'pyramidPointVector[pyramidPointVectorOffset]=adjustedShadowMaskBools[rowAlignmentCounter]...' or whatever.
> - Uses an obscure (in the modern era) outdated language like some Cinema aficionado who refuses to watch movies in color like all those plebians
But also like someone who uses any highly specific tool for experts instead of the standard thing an ordinary person might find at Walmart.