Re: "The Best Programming Language for the End of the World"

"Others". That's a philosophical question. Answering it greatly
influences ones view on documentation:

Others are not me. I write a lot of documentation but it does assume
that I myself will be reading it (at a time I have not lost my marbles
yet). There's a lot of documentation out there that (rightly so)
assumes its readers know nothing of and don't care about the subject
and just want to know how an option is called, and if it does what they
approximately think it should do (I am in that class myself when looking
up, e.g., OS functions).
I think that type of documentation should be left to professional
writers.
When presenting a code snippet in this forum, my approach would not
do. If even a tiny detail is not explained, the post will not
work for a casual reader. To know *why* it doesn't work you need
to be able to think like a `professional writer`, not like the
original programmer.
Unfortunately (?) my approach only works for small, dedicated
programs. There are examples where I wanted to write a bigger
application (e.g. MANX, SPIFSIM, SYSSIM, iSPICE, ..). I am
constantly trying to refactor those programs in small stand-alone
modules but I have failed (e.g. MANX which has horrible
object-oriented rubbish) when I (perhaps temporarily) lost
interest in the subject itself.
As I am also a ngspice maintainer (19,161 'C' Files in 4,856
directories, only user documentation), I know my Forth
approach works (iSPICE has only 7 dedicated files).
-marcel