Cello – High Level C
libcello.org
Cello – High Level C
1–10 of 83 posts
Re: Cello – High Level C
#2Re: Cello – High Level C
#3Seen this posted here years ago. Now as then, my gut feeling is that anyone doing serious work in C would never use something like this-- I feel like the fine grained low level control is exactly the reason they chose C in the first place, and they're not looking to escape from it or they would just choose a different language.
Re: Cello – High Level C
#4Why not just C++?
Re: Cello – High Level C
#5Why not just C++?
Speaking for myself, I’ve never found C++’s complexity appealing, and it only seems to be getting worse over the last 20 years.
As the creator says, it’s not for production use. If I’m doing a side project, I’d give this a serious look.
Re: Cello – High Level C
#6Seen this posted here years ago. Now as then, my gut feeling is that anyone doing serious work in C would never use something like this-- I feel like the fine grained low level control is exactly the reason they chose C in the first place, and they're not looking to escape from it or they would just choose a different language.
"Why does this exist?
I made Cello as a fun experiment to see what C looks like hacked to its limits. As well as being a powerful library and toolkit, it should be interesting to those who want to explore what is possible in C."
"Can it be used in Production? It might be better to try Cello out on a hobby project first. Cello does aim to be production ready, but because it is a hack it has its fair share of oddities"
It sounds like they don't intend for it to be anything other than an interesting case study.
Re: Cello – High Level C
#7Why not just C++?
Speaking for myself, I’ve never found C++’s complexity appealing, and it only seems to be getting worse over the last 20 years. As the creator says, it’s not for production use. If I’m doing a side project, I’d give this a serious look.
I agree wholeheartedly with this. You can write high level code in C++, but the cost is a terribly complex language and standard library.
In contrast, the C language is fairly simple, except for a few twisty passages (pointer declaration syntax, anyone?). The standard library does leave something to be desired, but that's not that big of a deal given all the third party libraries out there.
It would be interesting to compare the same program written in straight C vs C++ vs Cello, both for developer experience issues (clarity, simplicity, etc.) and performance. I'll have to have a look at http://libcello.org/learn/benchmarks but this does really seem like something I'd like to use on a personal project someday.
Re: Cello – High Level C
#8What type of sorcery is this?
Re: Cello – High Level C
#9Previously https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14091630
Re: Cello – High Level C
#10Why not just C++?
Speaking for myself, I’ve never found C++’s complexity appealing, and it only seems to be getting worse over the last 20 years. As the creator says, it’s not for production use. If I’m doing a side project, I’d give this a serious look.
> Speaking for myself, I’ve never found C++’s complexity appealing, and it only seems to be getting worse over the last 20 years.
True, but that's why we've got Rust these days. (Rust is actually more optimized than C, e.g. it will automatically reshuffle your structs to get rid of excess padding, and reference accesses will automatically take advantage of compiler-checked 'restrict' constraints, thus equalizing performance with e.g. FORTRAN.)