91–100 of 132 posts
For my language, instead of targeting LLVM, I targeted C. That made me take off fast, because everything in C is available from day 1. What I did is build an extra layer over C to make it behave more like a scripting language. Used it for my website.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem here is that the project was made public for others to use/view. If someone wants to do a private project that impacts no-one else, it is then completely up to them as to whether they continue or not as it their choice. However, when one starts a project and says "look at me and the fabulous stuff I am doing" then it does not show them in a good light when they give up because they are now in the drudge w…
This seems like a very strange perspective. > The problem here is that the project was made public for others to use/view. This literally doesn't matter if we're talking about someone's character, because whether it's public or not is irrelevant regarding the " they give up because they are now in the drudge work" point. Either that point is valid or it's not, but the public knowing about it is beside the point. And…
It is a matter of what expectation they are creating and what they say they are trying to achieve.
I don't have any problems with someone creating a language to see what they can achieve with it. If they find it not doing what they need, they can move on. However, they can ambush themselves by the creation of a project that they claim is bigger than what they may actually have in mind.
I have lots of partial language designs to test out specific ideas. Many are incomplete because they have shown that the specific idea I was testing is basically flawed. The information is available to those I discuss this with for them to investigate in their own way. They can see the lessons I have learned, especially about the failures I have come across. But they know well that the work done is both incomplete and was created to test out one idea or another and may or may not be of any use to anyone else.
My discussion point is that the author could have handled himself better without reflecting on his character. Essentially, to say it is now too hard to keep going because it is tedious, boring or just too much effort required doesn't reflect well on him. He could have handled that a lot better and still put everything into a close down mode.
> > Most of the work that most of us have to do is not exciting, not learning new things, not even interesting. It is just drudgery that needs to be done to get to the eventual goal that we started with. This is life.
> There's nothing good about this, nor anything good about reinforcing it. Godspeed to those who can avoid it.
My question to you - do you have a plethora of servants to do all your drudgery work? Who cleans your toilet, washes your clothes, cooks your food, sweeps your floors, mows your lawns, changes your children's nappies, and so on and so forth? Who writes your correspondence, enters your passwords, writes your code, drives your car in traffic?
Far too often, people are taught today to skip the tedious, the uninteresting and the hard boring work and someone else has to come along and clean up after them.
I am not judging that he dared to do something, I am highlighting that the way he has stopped his project reflects badly on him. Whether he starts a project or stops that same project is up to him. It is the reasons he states for that start or stop that reflect positively or negatively on him.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I also don't grasp the logic behind the notion that once a creator shows his work -- or work-in-progress -- to the public that he is somehow bound by duty, honor, respect for his 'followers', or some other compelling consideration, to finish that work. You can show off your work in any way that you want. You are also not bound by duty or anything else to finish that work. However, if you are putting it out there fo…
Pretty much nobody but you has this perspective, it's completely irrelevant to the reality other people live in. And such a perspective is harmful, as it could discourage people from work under the false perception that an unfinished piece of work is worse than none. I'm not sure where you got this whole idea from, but it's not true, neither in the real sense nor in the perceived sense. People benefit from working on…
Yet I suspect that the intent of what he may have wanted to say is that final sentence above. But that's not what he said.
I'll say it again, there is no problem with unfinished work, if what you were trying to achieve has been completed.
But please, don't then say that you won't complete the work your doing because to do so would require hard work and it's just boring and tedious. This is what reflects negatively on you.
If you have achieved your goal then just say that and show what has been learned from the exercise. If you would like it to be continued but can't do so for whatever reason, which you do not have to state, then offer it to anyone else who might be able to take it on. You never know, you might get some takers. This reflects positively on you.
I had a similar thought process (but luckily without spending time implementing something). I want to write a game. I thought, "None of the current languages works quite the way I want. I know! I'll write a language specifically for my game and just keep implementing the bits I need". Then I thought, "Wait. If I do that, I'll spend 90% of my time writing a language and 10% of my time writing a game". So I was saved.…
I found myself having the same problem, luckily I don't know how to write a language.
I'm currently working on a part-time project in Go, it involve a HTTP service.
As you may already knew, there is a built-in HTTP server that came with Go, so I COULD just took it and go ahead directly start to implement my service logic.
But hell no, it's too slow. So instead, I made my own HTTP/1.1 server, which is bit faster than Go's.
It was pretty fun to write that server indeed, but I don't think it's worth the trouble. In fact, I really really hope somebody stopped me when I was creating that `http.go` file.
Now, I'm wandering around, thinking the `html/template` is too slow ...
I think it is important to have a big goal though (like TeX) to keep you motivated and moving forward.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Games are still in need of a better language. I have some skepticism and hope for Jai. I really wish D as better C worked better in that realm, but it's missing a few crucial things. Rust asserts too much control over memory. I'm all ears for anything that's somewhere between C and C++ as an alternative to write games in. Most new languages just don't get the things right that C++ did, which is why despite it having…
Here is a direction if you are all ears : instead of a new language, add a new layer. I tried creating my own languages before, some 15 years ago. While I had fun writing compilers, I missed a lot more writing actual programs. One day I suddenly realized I don't really need new language, what I needed is simply context dependent syntax and code block organization, which can easily implemented on the spot. It become M…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Only because rust has an unstable ABI. I feel like it'd be nice to have rust provide an explicit "rust-stable" ABI for those kind of things.
Really curious, is there much of a usecase for a stable rust ABI? There is no ecosystem of "rusty shared objects" to support and cargo tends to build things fine without it. As an outside observer it looks like an unnecessary complication.
For the second use-case, distributions can handle that somewhat okay by simply enforcing that all packages are compiled with the same rustc version. That works okay, but it means that, as an external user, you can't really depend on those libraries for your own executables, as you'll need to recompile when the distribution updates.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was almost like OP for a while. Working on game, fed up with existing languages (even C), wanted a better C. I was excited about Jai, but as time goes on I'm finding it looks less and less what I want from a language. Seriously considered making my own. Then I started working with Zig[0]. It's about 90% the language I want and even though it's still immature and the syntax, std lib, and semantics are in flux, I sti…
Zig is Linux-first, though. I don't think they have any dev who runs Windows. For games especially, you don't want Windows to be an afterthought. Maybe they'll get to it eventually, but it doesn't seem a priority.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Games are still in need of a better language. I have some skepticism and hope for Jai. I really wish D as better C worked better in that realm, but it's missing a few crucial things. Rust asserts too much control over memory. I'm all ears for anything that's somewhere between C and C++ as an alternative to write games in. Most new languages just don't get the things right that C++ did, which is why despite it having…
> Games are still in need of a better language. I find Swift to be the best so far, its strong ties to the Apple ecosystem notwithstanding. Having tinkered with various environments since the Sinclair Spectrum's BASIC (though back then I had no idea what I was doing) I've successively fallen in love with Visual Basic (6.0, not the .NET impostor) and then C#, and now I'm smitten with Swift. In Microsoft land I was let…
To the point the Windows UI team does all their graphics demos in C#.