the problem with "systems programming languages" is that is a way to generic term because every program is a system in itself, is not a operating system, which is another generic term that makes no sense either. And forgets that in the past there were computer systems written with languages that people won't consider today "systems programming language" like Basic, some mainframe was built like that, in its firmware had a compiler for basic. I think the best way to call them is mid level languages, is programing languages with high level syntax that allow to describe low level instructions, hence midlevel. And to me, the most important is C, some maintainer of some important compiler of C, should be there.
That's the usual en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_change. When we define our terms, we go against this natural tendency of our society+language, more or less successfully. Unless actively fought, you can see crazy strange shifts such as for example, nowadays, "literally" means "figuratively". Naturally, the energy available to defend previously defined terms is limited, so there is always some give and take. One mechanism for defined terms to lose original meaning is that other people want to piggyback on the term for essentially marketing (promotion) reasons. Go trying to redefine "systems programming" for the new era was a weird example of this. Not sure if it got them anything. Well, it did get Rob Pike a place in this panel, I guess :P
Nice. Another channel that uploaded this video was deleted for some reason, so I found it here.
the problem with "systems programming languages" is that is a way to generic term because every program is a system in itself, is not a operating system, which is another generic term that makes no sense either. And forgets that in the past there were computer systems written with languages that people won't consider today "systems programming language" like Basic, some mainframe was built like that, in its firmware had a compiler for basic.
I think the best way to call them is mid level languages, is programing languages with high level syntax that allow to describe low level instructions, hence midlevel.
And to me, the most important is C, some maintainer of some important compiler of C, should be there.
That's the usual en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_change. When we define our terms, we go against this natural tendency of our society+language, more or less successfully. Unless actively fought, you can see crazy strange shifts such as for example, nowadays, "literally" means "figuratively". Naturally, the energy available to defend previously defined terms is limited, so there is always some give and take. One mechanism for defined terms to lose original meaning is that other people want to piggyback on the term for essentially marketing (promotion) reasons.
Go trying to redefine "systems programming" for the new era was a weird example of this. Not sure if it got them anything. Well, it did get Rob Pike a place in this panel, I guess :P
go doesn't really belong here i think