Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Programming Language Checklist (2011)

mcmillen.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 22 posts

Re: Programming Language Checklist (2011)

#3

Post by mjburgess »

imv, we're still missing a C replacement-successor

There should be a language about as simple as c, with a few additional keywords for safety (type and memory), and a modern standard library -- that works basically everywhere C works, and is backwards compatible with C.

ie., we're missing --C++

I think all the supposed successors have approached the problem from the lang-design pov, where for C, it needs to be from-existing-compilers-and-tools pov.

I suspect there's a route to C v2 by starting with the C std, and gcc/clang, then working "forwards". Similar to cppfront for C++.

ie., it needs to compile 99% of all existing C code, it needs to compile to 90% of all in-use platform for C, etc.

Re: Programming Language Checklist (2011)

#6

Post by pharmakom »

urbandw311er wrote: post #5
pharmakom wrote: post #4

Quite funny, but I want people to advance the state of the art. Does C++ / Java / Python really represent the high water mark of programming languages? I sure hope not…

Surely C# superceded C++ as the better example?

C# is more like Java than C++

Re: Programming Language Checklist (2011)

#7

Post by vbitz »

mjburgess wrote: post #3

imv, we're still missing a C replacement-successor There should be a language about as simple as c, with a few additional keywords for safety (type and memory), and a modern standard library -- that works basically everywhere C works, and is backwards compatible with C. ie., we're missing --C++ I think all the supposed successors have approached the problem from the lang-design pov, where for C, it needs to be from-e…

What would be great is a language that does to C what TypeScript did to JavaScript.

C but with better safety and additional developer ergonomics would be amazing.

Part of the problem is I think you would need to depart from the traditional C build system to get the most benefits. That will be hard for adoption.

Re: Programming Language Checklist (2011)

#9

Post by cyco130 »

mjburgess wrote: post #3

imv, we're still missing a C replacement-successor There should be a language about as simple as c, with a few additional keywords for safety (type and memory), and a modern standard library -- that works basically everywhere C works, and is backwards compatible with C. ie., we're missing --C++ I think all the supposed successors have approached the problem from the lang-design pov, where for C, it needs to be from-e…

You may find Zig interesting: https://ziglang.org. The language is not C compatible but the tooling can compile C and C++ without hassle.

Re: Programming Language Checklist (2011)

#10

Post by dailykoder »

mjburgess wrote: post #3

imv, we're still missing a C replacement-successor There should be a language about as simple as c, with a few additional keywords for safety (type and memory), and a modern standard library -- that works basically everywhere C works, and is backwards compatible with C. ie., we're missing --C++ I think all the supposed successors have approached the problem from the lang-design pov, where for C, it needs to be from-e…

>There should be a language about as simple as c,

I just recently started to dip my feet into golang and it feels like Go could've been something like that. With it's runtime and garbage collection that obviously disqualifies itself, but it's a really simple and fun language, I think. Something like that as a systems programming language with """easy""" memory management would be tremendous (maybe Zig is like that, but I haven't tried that out yet).

Post reply on HN