C (Cbang) - A system oriented programming language

Post by sigzero » Wed, May 09, 2012, 5:34 PM UTC

0xABADC0DA wrote: post #34

kibwen wrote: post #3

I think that languages that are a just thin shell on top of C (as opposed to languages that merely target C, e.g. Chicken Scheme) might have some potential. I'll call this coffeescriptification --still eagerly awaiting the first transpiled language that does nothing but remove C's braces and semicolons. If someone doesn't do it by next April Fools, I certainly will (I already have the name in mind: Glee (the italics…

One thing often overlooked in language design is the filename. It's 2012, why are languages still stuck with IBM-era filename extentions when they could use unicode?! For instance: Rust: filename.ℛ Java: filename.☕ Glee: filename.☺ Isn't that just so much clearer and nicer-looking than ".rs" or ".java" or ".g"? It's really the fine aesthetic points like this that can make or break a language.

Post by pcwalton » Wed, May 09, 2012, 5:42 PM UTC

pjmlp wrote: post #30

antirez wrote: post #12

I didn't checked the details, but I would love to see ten attempts every year, trying to solve the same problem. D and Go are not trying to provide us with a better C, because they don't share the concept of, a language that translates straightforward to assembler, but still is designed so that you can mount good abstractions with it. This is what you need for kernel programming, embedded systems, and a good deal of…

Native Oberon, Spin, Singularity, Home, Inferno are all operating systems written in GC enabled system programming languages. D and Go are just following that thread. Eventually all mainstream OS will have such type of languages and C will be legacy. Microsoft is already slowly doing that by dropping support for C later than C90, and adding COM based API as the default Windows API. Now mainly for Metro, perhaps for t…

Post by pcwalton » Wed, May 09, 2012, 5:46 PM UTC

simias wrote: post #22

marijn wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rust isn't finished yet. It's about to get 'regions', which come with custom allocators.

Hey, thanks for pointing that out (and thanks to kibwen for the link). I've been trying to use (or rather, bend) rust for kernel development lately, and memory allocation was my biggest limitation so far (including stack allocation). Definitely looking forward to future improvement on the language, it looks very promising.

Post by calloc » Wed, May 09, 2012, 6:04 PM UTC

pjmlp wrote: post #40

Arelius wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting that none of those systems are in active usage... > Eventually all mainstream OS will have such type of languages and C will be legacy. That's just speculation. Personally I have high hopes for languages with optional-only GC, and much stricter memory management principals. Ala, Rust.

Windows and Mac OS X are, and they are slowly incorporating such changes, as I mentioned. Don't forget that UNIX was once upon a time a research operating system, and took a few decades to have industry impact. New ideas take time to mature.

Post by jff » Wed, May 09, 2012, 6:11 PM UTC

Arelius wrote: post #36

pjmlp wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Native Oberon, Spin, Singularity, Home, Inferno are all operating systems written in GC enabled system programming languages. D and Go are just following that thread. Eventually all mainstream OS will have such type of languages and C will be legacy. Microsoft is already slowly doing that by dropping support for C later than C90, and adding COM based API as the default Windows API. Now mainly for Metro, perhaps for t…

Interesting that none of those systems are in active usage... > Eventually all mainstream OS will have such type of languages and C will be legacy. That's just speculation. Personally I have high hopes for languages with optional-only GC, and much stricter memory management principals. Ala, Rust.