Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

The need for a more standard language

This topic is 5824 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

That''s it. I just have to say it. We need a language this is easy to use, OOP, extendable, foreignly import functions and does not have areas in which it is inconsistant(no, not a BCPL derived language.) It could take a few things from C, C++, python (That''s a few libraries), Ruby, and other languages. It should be easy to use and not have constant idiosyncrosies. Now, why? Because C is too complex in the wrong way. It takes too long to explain, and it''s syntax is confusing. (Is that because it was mainly made by different people using ASM?) I mean, classes are just plain confusing, and the python way of implementing them would also be a great idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah? Well if you make that language and get all the APIs that support C++, Java, Python, etc. to support it, not to mention 90% of all programmers to aaccept it, then I''ll gladly learn it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, I realize that. But I''m pretty sure that the language has to be designed so that it can use functions from other languages. Maybe I''m wrong, but that''s not exactly the point I was trying to make.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ha ha ha. If you don''t like C/C++ because it''s too complicated, then use BASIC. The fact of the matter is C and C++ are superb languages. If you think the syntax is too complex, then you probably don''t understand the syntax.

Have you ever watched a Kung Fu movie (such as Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon) and heard some Chinese, and think it was just a bunch of gibberish? Well, that''s what I thought too, until I learned Mandarin. Now I can communicate with any Chinese person just as well as I can speak in my native English tongue. I used to think Chinese was ugly and too difficult; now I understand the error of my ways. Mandarin Chinese is a very beautiful language. After 6 years of programming in C/C++, I feel the same way. Learn the language before you criticize it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by Andrew Nguyen
That''s it. I just have to say it. We need a language this (that) is easy to use, OOP,...
I mean, classes are just plain confusing...



1. How can you have an OOP language without classes?

2. You keep speaking of BCPL and ALGOL. Yes, I do know that they are the predecessors of C, C++, Java, etc. before you bother to tell me that. But do you actually know C/C++ or any other modern language? If you did, I don''t even think you would have started this thread.

quote:
Original post by Andrew Nguyen
We need a language this is easy to use, OOP, extendable, foreignly import functions...

I know a language that already does this. It begins with C, ends with +, and has a + in the middle.


No, HTML is not an OO language.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NO !! ur all wrong!! we need a language that will write programs for us!! we will sit there and it will be like, heres your 5-star program, big boy. It will be the most brilliant, easy to use program maker-uper ever made!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OMG... What I meant was that their are inconsistancies,
for example...

My Grammar:English::C/C++rogramming

The structurization is nice, but when you get into classes IN BCPL based languages... that''s when it starts...

You now, just forget it. You people are too literal and to destructive, no suggestion!ONLY FLAME!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
im sorry, but you need to list some languages that are not inconsistant, because im not really sure where youve gone with that.
you must keep in mind that your talking to people that are somewhat satisfied with c++... maybe if you could be more specific...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Of course C/C++ has idiosyncracies - that comes out of a language evolving over time and maintining historical precedent.

Just look at any spoken language - they evolve idiosyncracies but maintain certain ''compatibilities''

Any language that has evolved is complex. A perfectly constructed language can often have limitations of expression. Who speaks Esperanto?

At any rate - many people have created languages with such goals - e.g. Java or C# - ( albeit both were created with other alterior motives ) so feel free to make the effort to create a new and better one.

Language is just a tool of communication. Programmers use the tools that accomplish the task required and are familiar.

Is english the best language? No. But many people speak it for various reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If we don't reconize the inconsistencies, how'd you expect
us to desire a language without them?

Break our molds and shatter our compliant non-existence,
shock the world by removing us from it, if thou wish to
crack the crust the world must be moved and shaken violently
until the core screams 'I yield I yield I yield to your
power!", change the universe by making them realize they are not
the same and the glory shall be great and the price terrible
and all will be silent before a new dawn crashes and drowns
out the old, decadent, and decayed putrified ruins.

C/C++ syntax isn't confusing. It's just a bunch of colons,
semicolons, parentheses, brackets, letters, numbers, words,
asterisks, ampresands, carets, forward slashes, double and
single quotes, question marks, percent signs, exclamation
marks, periods, less than signs, greater than signs, equal
signs, curly braces, addition symbols, subtraction symbols,
commas, tildes, maybe some whitespace, and whatever that
symbol is called that's used in the OR operator. (And
that's just off the top of my head, didn't need a book
or nothing.)

It may sound like a lot but you need the functionality of
all of them for any language, but some could serve the
same function as a couple of others.

I think Python is worse cause whitespace is used as syntax
and the only thing with less syntax than C is Basic cause
it doens't have hardly any.

Create.
Liv Tyler makes a really great elf.

Edited by - RolandofGilead on January 1, 2002 4:04:37 AM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
You now, just forget it. You people are too literal and to destructive, no suggestion!ONLY FLAME!


If you didn''t want us to be "literal and destructive" then don''t bring up a piss-poor arguement.

Thanks
Pactuul

"The thing I like about friends in my classes is that they can''t access my private members directly."
"When listening to some one tell about their problem (whether it''s code or not), don''t listen to what went right or wrong, but what they assumed....."



Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by Andrew Nguyen
That''s it. I just have to say it. We need a language this is easy to use, OOP, extendable, foreignly import functions and does not have areas in which it is inconsistant(no, not a BCPL derived language.)
It could take a few things from C, C++, python (That''s a few libraries), Ruby, and other languages.

Java & C#?

I want to see C++ evolve more, but I''m not interested in dropping features to make it easier to use.

Which idiosyncrosies bother you the most?


My Grammar:English::C/C++rogramming

That doesn''t quite compile, so what exactly were you trying to say?
:: is the scope resolution operator, you always use everytime you want to resolve scope.


MyEngine::Graphics::CGraphicsEngine::Create();

Would you want a different operator for the namespace resolution vs. the class resolution? A namespace isn''t much different from a class with all public members...

Sometime people complain that you have to use two different operators with objects, namely . and ->

Magmai Kai Holmlor

"Oh, like you''ve never written buggy code" - Lee

"What I see is a system that _could do anything - but currently does nothing !" - Anonymous CEO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous Poster
Andrew, looking at your past posts it is clear to see that you are an unhappy person. If you dont like C/C++ stop using them and your troubles will be over. If you aren''t going to take the time and learn one or both of them to add to your self proclaimed "lots of languages" then why are you bothering the people on this board with your ranting. You keep saying you are bringing up valid points but you only appear to be complaining about something you are the only one with the power to fix (your knowledge of C/C++). Now if you want to make a new language, great, I wish you all the luck in the world and hope you make it all you wish C/C++ was. But if you are only going to complain about things you cant change (C/C++) or gripe about things you can change but won''t (your knowledge of C/C++) then do us a really big favor. Pipe down until you have something constructive to bring to the table. And by the way, this is not a flame and should not be taken that way. It is called constructive criticism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by RolandofGilead
C/C++ syntax isn''t confusing. It''s just a bunch of colons,
semicolons, parentheses, brackets, letters, numbers, words,
asterisks, ampresands, carets, forward slashes, double and
single quotes, question marks, percent signs, exclamation
marks, periods, less than signs, greater than signs, equal
signs, curly braces, addition symbols, subtraction symbols,
commas, tildes, maybe some whitespace, and whatever that
symbol is called that''s used in the OR operator. (And
that''s just off the top of my head, didn''t need a book
or nothing.)

You forgot circumflex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
My Grammar:English::C/C++Programming

I think those symbols were supposed to be comparisons, like My Grammer is to English as C/C++ is to programming ... I think he's trying to insult it!

Edited by - Zipster on January 1, 2002 6:56:28 AM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think he has a point. C++ does have more than its fair share of idiosyncrasies and inconsistencies, which is what one would expect from a language that has been designed by accumulation(and unlike Andrew, I actually do know C++ - well). There also seems to be this "Emperors new clothes" effect that prevents people from acknowledging this.

Fantastic doctrines (like Christianity or Islam or Marxism or Microsoft-bashing) require unanimity of belief. One dissenter casts doubt on the creed of millions. Thus the fear and hate; thus the torture chamber, the iron stake, the gallows, the labor camp, the psychiatric ward - Edward Abbey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
that''s what you get when you''d use Python all your life...

Me : Python :: EveryoneElse : C/C++ (Any BCPL derived language at that)

And yes, IT IS AN ANALOGY!!! Not a scope. And yes, I know what they are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
that''s what you get when you''d use Python all your life...

Me : Python :: EveryoneElse : C/C++ (Any BCPL derived language at that)

And yes, IT IS AN ANALOGY!!! Not a scope. And yes, I know what they are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wavering between trying to impress us and just plain pissing us off ("Failings of ALGOL/BCPL languages", "Ruby or Python", "rejoice - Python has a butt-ugly flag")... would you just stop and be fucking productive? If none of the available languages suit you, write your own. Don''t tell us until it''s functional and available, because we prefer to actually do things with our time and existing tools. Yes, they may not be the best - heck, they may be poor - but they work.

And now you should too.

[ GDNet Start Here | GDNet FAQ | MS RTFM | STL | Google ]
Thanks to Kylotan for the idea!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites