You cannot see any way in which we run out of possible abstraction layers? I think in the past we have assumed that was natural language, but I think natural language is a pretty poor programming language. What people actually want when they say that, is for someone to read all the nuance out of their mind and codify it.
I don't think we actually have been abstracting new layers over the past day 5-10 years anyway. Most of what I see is moving sideways, not up the stack. Covering more breadth not height or depth, of abstractions.
> Most of what I see is moving sideways, not up the stack. Covering more breadth not height or depth, of abstractions.
loading story #43074556
We only run out of abstraction once there is stagnation and time to really bake.
As long as some new thing is being invented in our industry, a new abstraction will be needed because the old one just can’t quite flex enough while being backwards compatible.
loading story #43059560