[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: C++ religious war
- From: David Given <dg@...>
- Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2014 13:51:36 +0000
On 21/03/14 11:42, steve donovan wrote:
> It is an uncomfortable time to be a language purist because "worse is
> better" always dominates, ultimately because most programmers are not
> mathematicians and don't particularly care about the optimal solution,
> just the one that works.
People may be interested in a toy language project I've been kicking
about, called Cowbel:
It's a deliberate attempt to produce a language that fits the same
ecological niche as Go but with *as few features as possible*. That is,
where Go tends to add a specific feature to perform a specific task,
I've been trying to add a fundamental abstraction which can be used
(among other things) to add library support for the task.
So far I've managed to remove named types, aggregate storage, scopes,
inheritance, RTTI, and a whole bunch of other stuff while still having
with interfaces and generics. I was eventually aiming for channels,
exceptions and prototype-based inheritance based on object composition,
but got distracted by something shiny.
At some point I need to throw away the compiler and have another go, and
see if I can get something that's useful for writing real programs.
┌─── ｄｇ＠ｃｏｗｌａｒｋ．ｃｏｍ ───── http://www.cowlark.com ─────
│ "There does not now, nor will there ever, exist a programming
│ language in which it is the least bit hard to write bad programs." ---
│ Flon's Axiom
Description: OpenPGP digital signature