I think interesting/relevant:

- http://blog.regehr.org/archives/1180

Cheers,
Vic

On Thursday, 28 August 2014 at 17:49:44 UTC, Vic Cekvenich wrote:
> I think interesting/relevant:
>
> - http://blog.regehr.org/archives/1180

This reminds me of how one of my coworkers suggested at one point that it would be great if someone created cleaner, safer C - but didn't try and add fancy features to it. For example, you have a module system instead of the preprocessor or arrays with a length member, but you don't add stuff like classes or a GC. The "new" stuff int he language would basically just be cleaning up existing features in C rather than adding anything major to it. So, you'd get a language that's more modern and less error-prone than C, but it's still very simple. But as nice an idea as that might be, I doubt that such a language would stand much of a chance. Anyone creating a new language is going to want to add new stuff, not just clean up C. And the diehard C guys probably would refuse to look at anything but C regardless. It at least sounds like a nice idea in principle though. This "friendly C" doesn't go that far, but it is essentially trying to do the same thing - have a cleaner, more friendly version of C.

- Jonathan M Davis

These are of similar nature I believe for c++

http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~damian/papers/PDF/ModestProposal.pdf
http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~damian/papers/PDF/SPECS.pdf

This paper was by my c++ lecturer at the time it was published. A fantastic coder as well as academic who unfortunately was lost to Perl around the same time :D Below is an example of what that does to a person :)

http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~damian/papers/HTML/Perligata.html

Cheers uri

On Thursday, 28 August 2014 at 18:30:09 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
> On Thursday, 28 August 2014 at 17:49:44 UTC, Vic Cekvenich The "new" stuff int he language would basically just be cleaning up existing features in C rather than adding anything major to it. So, you'd get a language that's more modern and less error-prone than C, but it's still very simple. But as nice an idea as that might be, I doubt that such a language would stand much of a chance. Anyone creating a new language is going to want to add new stuff, not just clean up C.

Many would say otherwise. I think the reason alot of modern
languages like python, java and c# exist is because its easier to
look at them and not get a headache. Which means they were
derived from the concept of having a programming language that
was not just user friendly, but also cleaner and easier to learn
than the mess that is C/C++.

Believe it or not, many of us are here because of that very
reason, we want something that is just or nearly as good as C/C++
but without the mess. Even if its still using the C/C++ training
wheels.

On Friday, 29 August 2014 at 00:50:35 UTC, Israel wrote:
> Believe it or not, many of us are here because of that very
> reason, we want something that is just or nearly as good as C/C++
> but without the mess. Even if its still using the C/C++ training
> wheels.

Of course, but that inevitably leads to a language with new, fancy features rather than something that's essentially just a cleaned up C. D cleans up lots of stuff from C++, but it added tons of stuff of its own. And even a simple language like Go added new stuff (though it also took away features from C). I'd be surprised to see a language take off that was anything close to just a cleaned up C, much as such a language would theoretically be nice to have in a variety of contexts.

- Jonathan M Davis