我有一本书探讨了SNOBOL中的各种项目。第一章探讨了SNOBOL编程和语言的历史和文化，并花了一些时间论证一个优秀的程序员喜欢一种语言不是因为它的缺陷，而是尽管有缺陷。

我最喜欢的语言是Icon/Unicon。但还是有一些事情让我很恼火:

它不是很出名，也不是很受欢迎。 与PHP、Perl、Java等相比，它的库要小得多。数据库访问是通过ODBC完成的，这实际上非常烦人。 对于所有其他出色的列表处理，我想念PHP内置的explosion()和implode()。 它没有表常数。列表，是的，表格，不是。 它是一种编译(实际翻译)语言。

PHP

几乎每个标准函数都在全局作用域中 不一致的函数参数顺序 不一致的函数命名 不区分大小写的函数 脚本的行为可能会因php.ini文件的不同而有所不同 能够使用未定义的变量 在某些情况下，必须将结果赋值给变量，然后才能在函数中使用它

更主观地说:

动态类型

Delphi(又名Object Pascal)，我将讨论本机版本，而不是。net。

Var块! 语言中的接口在设计时就考虑到了COM的使用——因此比c#或Java要复杂得多。ie。涉及引用计数，除非显式禁用它。 没有尝试，只有最终结束; 对象创建过于显式: var obj: TMyObject; .．. obj:= TMyObject.Create; 试一试 .．. 最后 obj.Free; 结束;

而是像这样

auto obj: TMyObject; // compiler adds the default constructor call and the destructor call in a try/finally block. 

好吧，语言太好了，我真的想不出更多，所以我在这里强迫自己:内置类型，如字符串，整数..或者枚举最好有方法。ie。i. tostring代替IntToStr(i)。

再给c++投一票…仍然是我最喜欢的语言，有几个亲密的追随者——C和Python。以下是我目前最讨厌的名单，排名不分先后:

Plethora of integer types inherited from C - way too many problems caused by signed vs. unsigned mistakes Copy constructors and assignment operators - why can't the compiler create one from the other automatically? Variable argument madness - va_list just doesn't work with objects and I'm so sick of problems created with sprintf(), snprintf(), vsnprintf(), and all of their relatives. Template implementation is required to be fully visible at compile time - I'm thinking of the lack of "export" implementations or at least usable ones Lack of support for properties - I want to have a read-only member like "a.x" that can be read publicly and only assigned internally. I really hate the "val=obj.getX()" and "obj.setX(val)". I really want properties with access control and a consistent syntax.

我觉得最喜欢的语言是不可能选择的。动态类型和静态类型不能进行比较，所以我只列出我使用的是哪一种类型

C++:

Template metaprogramming syntax is ugly. An implicit ::value would make it much more concise ->. Why can't the compiler figure out that I'm doing a ptr.thing and just do -> for me? I hate whitespace. So the whole vector<vector<int>> has to be vector<vector<int> > makes me get the jitters and then I can't focus whenever I see that line of code and I end up trying to figure out a way to use int[][] or something Macros. I personally love the concept of macros. But with C++, I that the system is a hack I'm a hater of ;

Python:

字符串是不可变的。这样我就不能用string[4]="b" 通过引用隐式复制列表。哪个泄漏到[[0]*width]*height问题 缺少尾递归(每当我输入错误递归函数时，我必须安装IDLE以避免吐出1000条错误消息) 字典键不接受列表/字典 缺乏深度范围。当我做一个列表推导时，我不希望其中的变量影响到外部作用域

C++

Strings. They are not interoperable with platform strings, so you end up using std::vector half of the time. The copy policy (copy on write or deep copy) is not defined, so performance guarantees can not be given for straightforward syntax. Sometimes they rely on STL algorithms that are not very intuitive to use. Too many libraries roll their own which are unfortunately much more comfortable to use. Unless you have to combine them. Variety of string representations Now, this is a little bit of a platform problem - but I still hope it would have been better when a less obstinate standard string class would have been available earlier. The following string representations I use frequently: generic LPCTSTR, LPC(W)STR allocated by CoTaskMemAlloc, BSTR, _bstr _t (w)string, CString, std::vector a roll-my-own class (sigh) that adds range checking and basic operations to a (w)char * buffer of known length Build model. I am sick to death of all the time spent muddling around with who-includes-what, forward declarations, optimizing precompiled headers and includes to keep at least incremental build times bearable, etc. It was great in the eighties, but now? There are so many hurdles to packing up a piece of code so it can be reused that even moms dog gets bored listening to me. Hard to parse This makes external tools especially hard to write, and get right. And today, we C++ guys are lacking mostly in the tool chain. I love my C# reflection and delegates but I can live without them. Without great refactoring, I can't. Threading is too hard Language doesn't even recognize it (by now), and the freedoms of the compiler - while great - are to painful. Static and on-demand initialization Technically, I cheat here: this is another puzzle piece in the "wrap up code for reuse": It's a nightmare to get something initialized only when it is needed. The best solution to all other redist problems is throwing everything into headers, this problem says "neeener - you cannot".

诚然，其中许多内容超出了严格的语言范围，但在我看来，整个工具链都需要进行判断和发展。