I'll just help you, because i am so nice!

If you go read you will see i asked the question "Name one?" quoting "If it wasn't for C++, there are plenty of other powerfull languages out there."

We are good so far? I hope yes!
You see that little sentence which is almost the first half of quote? "If it wasn't for C++"? I hope you do...

Now someone with a little reading comprehension (i suppose i do have some) would interpret that line like "Powerfull languages that could replace C++".

So i did and asked if he could name one, it wasn't hard no?
Come on, you can do better than this...

Sorry if i am being harsh.

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/

so wrote:
> I'll just help you, because i am so nice!
> 
> If you go read you will see i asked the question "Name one?" quoting "If it wasn't for C++, there are plenty of other powerfull languages out there."
> 
> We are good so far? I hope yes!
> You see that little sentence which is almost the first half of quote?
> "If it wasn't for C++"? I hope you do...
> 
> Now someone with a little reading comprehension (i suppose i do have some) would interpret that line like "Powerfull languages that could replace C++".
> 
> So i did and asked if he could name one, it wasn't hard no? Come on, you can do better than this...
> 
> Sorry if i am being harsh.
> 
plonk

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

Wow you are hopeless, i give up.

On Sat, 16 Oct 2010 15:48:17 +0300, Jérôme M. Berger <jeberger@free.fr> wrote:

> so wrote:
>> I'll just help you, because i am so nice!
>>
>> If you go read you will see i asked the question "Name one?" quoting "If
>> it wasn't for C++, there are plenty of other powerfull languages out
>> there."
>>
>> We are good so far? I hope yes!
>> You see that little sentence which is almost the first half of quote?
>> "If it wasn't for C++"? I hope you do...
>>
>> Now someone with a little reading comprehension (i suppose i do have
>> some) would interpret that line like "Powerfull languages that could
>> replace C++".
>>
>> So i did and asked if he could name one, it wasn't hard no?
>> Come on, you can do better than this...
>>
>> Sorry if i am being harsh.
>>
> plonk
>


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

On 10/16/10 6:39 CDT, div0 wrote:
> 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.

Solid one!

Andrei

Would that make Smalltalk, Lisp, Oberon, Modula-3, Component Pascal, Ada, Mac Pascal system programming languages?

All of them were used to write operating systems, in some of them the
operating system and
language are the same, kind of.

--
paulo

"div0" <div0@sourceforge.net> wrote in message news:i9c2ue$30f1$1@digitalmars.com...
> 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

On 16/10/2010 19:27, Paulo Pinto wrote:
> Would that make Smalltalk, Lisp, Oberon, Modula-3, Component Pascal, Ada,
> Mac Pascal system programming languages?
>
> All of them were used to write operating systems, in some of them the
> operating system and
> language are the same, kind of.

Well true, but the main problem with a lot of those systems is that you can only program on them in that language; they are all special execptions rather than general computers.

They used to make h/w Lisp machines back in the late 70s, where all the OS was written in Lisp; but you could only program them in Lisp. I wonder how they did the garbage collector as Lisp doesn't have pointers?

I guess they either wrote the garbage collector entierly in assembly or added a bunch of Lisp functions to allow them to manipulate the address space, effectively added pointers to the language.

For C, in principle you only need a trivial amount of assembly to handle the processor specific calls to switch privilege levels and load process/thread state.

For something like Java/Python you'd need a huge amount of assembly if you wanted to avoid using another lower level language.

There's nothing special about a systems language; it's just they have explicit facilities that make certain low level functionality easier to implement. You could implement an OS in BASIC using PEEK/POKE if you mad enough.

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

On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 1:36 AM, Paulo Pinto <pjmlp@progtools.org> wrote:
> Maybe you should improve your english skills. I was being sarcastic.
>

I ran a diagnostic on my English and guess what?  It's just fine! What's not fine is the way Gmail displays threads.  At least in my configuration, it looked like you were responding to my post.  So now I'm a more enlightened Gmailer.

dsimcha wrote:
> == 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

Good - ugly is better than nothing.  Can this be used for class members of struct's too?


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

If I wrote my own minimal run-time with no garbage collector I guess GC.free would be replaced by my own memory manager's free function. Does D allow me to hook my own allocation function into new?

On Sun, 17 Oct 2010 07:22:46 +0400, Steven Wawryk <stevenw@acres.com.au> wrote:

> dsimcha wrote:
>> == 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
>
> Good - ugly is better than nothing.  Can this be used for class members of struct's too?
>
>
>> delete foo -> foo.__dtor();  GC.free(cast(void*) foo);
>
> If I wrote my own minimal run-time with no garbage collector I guess GC.free would be replaced by my own memory manager's free function. Does D allow me to hook my own allocation function into new?

New uses gc_malloc under the hood, override it and you should be fine.

C does allow allocation on the stack.  But of course you're right that it doesn't have constructors/destructors, nor classes and OO.  It's interesting that device drivers for linux use a (partial) manual implementation of polymorphism and require a lot of boilerplate.

so wrote:
> C doesn't have scope mechanism (constructor/destructor) either, though it is a great tool.
> 
> On Fri, 15 Oct 2010 12:10:05 +0300, Steven Wawryk <stevenw@acres.com.au> wrote:
> 
>>
>> To me it means that it can be used for applications on platforms that provide no operating system support, for example tightly embedded applications or writing an operating system.  This implies that the language run-time (or at least the parts of it that need operating system support) is unavailable, so as much hardware interfacing and resource management as are needed by the application need to be written for the purpose.
>>
>> 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.
>>
>>
>> On 14/10/10 23:00, 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.
>>
> 
> 
> --Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/