Am Fr., 11. Sept. 2020 um 21:18 Uhr schrieb Lassi Kortela <xxxxxx@lassi.io>:

> Companies like to hire people who have wrestled with harder problems
> than they are likely to encounter at work. Same reason math/physics is
> valued for tech jobs.
>
> The real value to society from programming languages is to make code
> shorter while maintaining other desirable qualities (efficiency, safety,
> simplicity and ease of understanding of the tools and the product). Is a
> good Haskell or Idris program shorter than a good Scheme program? GHC is
> a giant program and Haskell performance is hard to reason about. The
> market has consistently voted against Idris/Adga-level complexity in the
> name of safety. (ATS is an earlier contender in the same vein, with no
> users.) The APL family has a higher level of abstraction than Haskell
> with shorter programs using fewer concepts, and orders of magnitude
> lighter tooling. Things like Mathematica and Torch are probably denser
> as well, though not necessarily lighter than GHC :)

I wouldn't pay too much attention to the market. If the market did
technical things always right, we wouldn't have PHP, nor Facebook, nor
Apple.

Art and the humanities* constitute a real value to society and,
moreover, a value that will last much longer than the industrial value
of a piece of software. And programming is an art.

*In this context, pure maths shall count to the humanities.