== Quote from Steven Wawryk (stevenw@acres.com.au)'s article

> C and C++ qualify.  I'm new to D and still learning about it, but with
> the deprecation of scoped classes and delete, I'm not sure that D qualifies.

Why?  The elimination of scope and delete just serves to uglyify the relevant concepts (which are unsafe and infrequently used) and save keywords.  The concepts can still be expressed:

scope T -> std.typecons.scoped!T

delete foo -> foo.__dtor();  GC.free(cast(void*) foo);

On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 11:39 PM, Paulo Pinto <pjmlp@progtools.org> wrote:
> You just ruled out C as a systems language.
>

No, C is a systems language and fits my definition.

1) C need not overlay software written in another language
2) C allows expression of essential machine independent concepts

How did inline assembly become a requirement?  For machine dependent code, I can just link C with assembly.

But it's still easy to nitpick against C.  For example, ANSI C cannot express the family of atomic operations, which one could argue are essential machine independent concepts.

Maybe you should improve your english skills. I was being sarcastic.

Next time, please read my email until the end, before hitting the reply button.

One of the Juanjo's requirements for a languange to be considered a systems programming language, is for it to include support for inline assembler.

I was just making a point that C fails his definition, because the inline assembler you find in most compilers is a vendor extension to the standard.

No one in his perfect mind would say that C is not a systems programming language, but it fails the Juanjo's checkpoint list, hence my reply.

--
Paulo

"SK" <sk@metrokings.com> wrote in message news:mailman.628.1287155971.858.digitalmars-d@puremagic.com...
> On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 11:39 PM, Paulo Pinto <pjmlp@progtools.org> wrote:
>> You just ruled out C as a systems language.
>>
>
> No, C is a systems language and fits my definition.
>
> 1) C need not overlay software written in another language
> 2) C allows expression of essential machine independent concepts
>
> How did inline assembly become a requirement?  For machine dependent code, I can just link C with assembly.
>
> But it's still easy to nitpick against C.  For example, ANSI C cannot express the family of atomic operations, which one could argue are essential machine independent concepts.

On Sat, 16 Oct 2010 10:36:48 +0200, "Paulo Pinto" <pjmlp@progtools.org> wrote:
> No one in his perfect mind would say that C is not a systems
> programming language, but it fails the Juanjo's checkpoint list,
> hence my reply.

In my defense I must say that I never used a C compiler without an inline assembler.

so wrote:
> I asked the similar question on "What do people here use as an IDE?", which i suppose the reason of this topic. And asked if anyone can name a language that can replace C (other than these two).
> 
> I got answers like Haskell, F#, C#, Scala, Ada, and there are many more
> they say.
> It looks like people here agree that all languages are system languages.
> 
	No, you got these answers when you asked for a list of "powerful
languages". A language may be "powerful" without being a systems
language.

		Jerome
-- 
mailto:jeberger@free.fr
http://jeberger.free.fr
Jabber: jeberger@jabber.fr

Not really, you got to read it again.

On Sat, 16 Oct 2010 13:02:17 +0300, Jérôme M. Berger <jeberger@free.fr> wrote:

> so wrote:
>> I asked the similar question on "What do people here use as an IDE?",
>> which i suppose the reason of this topic. And asked if anyone can name a
>> language that can replace C (other than these two).
>>
>> I got answers like Haskell, F#, C#, Scala, Ada, and there are many more
>> they say.
>> It looks like people here agree that all languages are system languages.
>>
> 	No, you got these answers when you asked for a list of "powerful
> languages". A language may be "powerful" without being a systems
> language.
>
> 		Jerome


-- 
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

Visual C++ 64bit no longer supports inline assembly, but they do offer
intrinsics instead
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/vcblog/archive/2007/10/18/new-intrinsic-support-in-visual-studio-2008.aspx


"Juanjo Alvarez" <fake@fakeemail.com> wrote in message news:almarsoft.3746932674979703085@news.digitalmars.com...
> On Sat, 16 Oct 2010 10:36:48 +0200, "Paulo Pinto" <pjmlp@progtools.org> wrote:
>> No one in his perfect mind would say that C is not a systems programming language, but it fails the Juanjo's checkpoint list, hence my reply.
>
> In my defense I must say that I never used a C compiler without an inline assembler.

On 16/10/2010 9:02 PM, "Jérôme M. Berger" wrote:
> so wrote:
>> I asked the similar question on "What do people here use as an IDE?",
>> which i suppose the reason of this topic. And asked if anyone can name a
>> language that can replace C (other than these two).
>>
>> I got answers like Haskell, F#, C#, Scala, Ada, and there are many more
>> they say.
>> It looks like people here agree that all languages are system languages.
>>
> 	No, you got these answers when you asked for a list of "powerful
> languages". A language may be "powerful" without being a systems
> language.
>
> 		Jerome

Excellent counterpoint. Could not have said it better.

Justin

No doubt.

On Sat, 16 Oct 2010 14:11:12 +0300, Justin Johansson <no@spam.com> wrote:

> On 16/10/2010 9:02 PM, "Jérôme M. Berger" wrote:
>> so wrote:
>>> I asked the similar question on "What do people here use as an IDE?",
>>> which i suppose the reason of this topic. And asked if anyone can name a
>>> language that can replace C (other than these two).
>>>
>>> I got answers like Haskell, F#, C#, Scala, Ada, and there are many more
>>> they say.
>>> It looks like people here agree that all languages are system languages.
>>>
>> 	No, you got these answers when you asked for a list of "powerful
>> languages". A language may be "powerful" without being a systems
>> language.
>>
>> 		Jerome
>
> Excellent counterpoint. Could not have said it better.
>
> Justin


-- 
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

On 14/10/2010 13:30, Justin Johansson wrote:
> Touted often around here is the term "systems language".
>
> May we please discuss a definition to be agreed upon
> for the usage this term (at least in this community) and
> also have some agreed upon examples of PLs that might also
> be members of the "set of systems languages".
> Given a general subjective term like this, one would have
> to suspect that the D PL is not the only member of this set.
>
> Cheers
> Justin Johansson
>
> PS. my apologies for posting a lame joke recently;
> certainly it was not meant to be disparaging towards
> the D PL and hopefully it was not taken this way.

Something not mentioned so far:

The language must be self hostable;
i.e. you need to be able to write it's runtime in the language itself.

-- 
My enormous talent is exceeded only by my outrageous laziness.
http://www.ssTk.co.uk