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: http://cowbel.sourceforge.net/index/ 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 it look and behave like a fast, fully compiled (via C) Javascript-esque 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
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature