You are seriously saying somehow that languages which abstract away hardware details are bad?
"Assembly? Bad! you should know the instructions op codes."
"C? Bad! you should know assembly! What are you trying to do? Write an operating system that is portable beyond the PDP architecture?"
"Java? Bad! You should manage your own memory! And the STL should be good enough for anyone."
Abstraction, by reducing complexity or making assumptions, allows developers to work faster or do more. Does this have negative side effects? Sure (see Joel's leaky abstractions article), but the benefits out weight the costs by several orders of magnitude. My evidence? The entire computer industry for the last 74 years.
Sorry I did not formulate my though properly. Let's try this:
Companies that try to use a language/platform combination to isolate the coder from the machine by creating a funnelled dumbed-down common interface and executing environment are pursuing a loose-loose path.
1. the HW evolves faster than the software
2. the coder wants to hack the most out of the hardware
3. the OpenSource community is a paradigm shift for software companies, you can't put the cat back in the bag.
"Assembly? Bad! you should know the instructions op codes."
"C? Bad! you should know assembly! What are you trying to do? Write an operating system that is portable beyond the PDP architecture?"
"Java? Bad! You should manage your own memory! And the STL should be good enough for anyone."
Abstraction, by reducing complexity or making assumptions, allows developers to work faster or do more. Does this have negative side effects? Sure (see Joel's leaky abstractions article), but the benefits out weight the costs by several orders of magnitude. My evidence? The entire computer industry for the last 74 years.