编程语言都在解决什么问题？
Paul Graham 通过 Kevin Kelleher 提出的视角，以“修复的问题”来描述每种编程语言的设计初衷，揭示了语言演化的历史脉络。从 Algol 到 Ruby，每个语言都是针对前代缺陷或特定需求的回应。这种简洁的对比不仅幽默，也为工程师理解语言选择提供了独特视角。适合对编程语言历史与设计感兴趣的读者。
Kevin Kelleher suggested an interesting way to compare programming languages: to describe each in terms of the problem it fixes. The surprising thing is how many, and how well, languages can be described this way.
Kevin Kelleher 提出了一种比较编程语言的有趣方式：根据每种语言解决的问题来描述它。令人惊讶的是，如此多的语言能够被这样描述，而且描述得如此贴切。
Algol: Assembly language is too low-level.
Algol：汇编语言过于底层。
Pascal: Algol doesn't have enough data types.
Pascal：Algol 没有足够的数据类型。
Modula: Pascal is too wimpy for systems programming.
Modula：Pascal 对于系统编程来说太弱了。
Simula: Algol isn't good enough at simulations.
Simula：Algol 在模拟方面不够好。
Smalltalk: Not everything in Simula is an object.
Smalltalk：Simula 中并非一切都是对象。
Fortran: Assembly language is too low-level.
Fortran：汇编语言过于底层。
Cobol: Fortran is scary.
Cobol：Fortran 令人害怕。
PL/1: Fortran doesn't have enough data types.
PL/1：Fortran 没有足够的数据类型。
Ada: Every existing language is missing something.
Ada：每种现有语言都缺少某些东西。
Basic: Fortran is scary.
Basic：Fortran 令人害怕。
APL: Fortran isn't good enough at manipulating arrays.
APL：Fortran 在数组操作上不够好。
J: APL requires its own character set.
J：APL 需要自己的字符集。
C: Assembly language is too low-level.
C：汇编语言过于底层。
C++: C is too low-level.
C++：C 过于底层。
Java: C++ is a kludge. And Microsoft is going to crush us.
Java：C++ 是个拼凑物，而且微软要碾压我们。
C#: Java is controlled by Sun.
C#：Java 由 Sun 控制。
Lisp: Turing Machines are an awkward way to describe computation.
Lisp：图灵机是一种笨拙的描述计算的方式。
Scheme: MacLisp is a kludge.
Scheme：MacLisp 是个拼凑物。
T: Scheme has no libraries.
T：Scheme 没有库。
Common Lisp: There are too many dialects of Lisp.
Common Lisp：Lisp 的方言太多。
Dylan: Scheme has no libraries, and Lisp syntax is scary.
Dylan：Scheme 没有库，而且 Lisp 语法吓人。
Perl: Shell scripts/awk/sed are not enough like programming languages.
Perl：Shell 脚本/awk/sed 不够像编程语言。
Python: Perl is a kludge.
Python：Perl 是个拼凑物。
Ruby: Perl is a kludge, and Lisp syntax is scary.
Ruby：Perl 是个拼凑物，而且 Lisp 语法吓人。
Prolog: Programming is not enough like logic.
Prolog：编程不够像逻辑。