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.

Jokes? sure!

System language is a language you can "actually" write "code" with it.

On Thu, 14 Oct 2010 15:30:02 +0300, Justin Johansson <no@spam.com> 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/

On Thu, 14 Oct 2010 23:30:02 +1100, 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.

From my pov, a systems programming language has pointers. That's all.

A language that is adequate for systems programming.

This leaves "adequate" and "systems programming" for definition...




On 10/14/2010 02:30 PM, 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.

On 14/10/2010 11:48 PM, Moritz Warning wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Oct 2010 23:30:02 +1100, 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.
>
>  From my pov, a systems programming language has pointers. That's all.

And therefore candidate languages might include ... and exclude ...?

That is too much to comprehend for some people. They think if a language is "able" to do something it doesn't matter how many million lines or knowledge to do that simple thing, and you can simply put "able to do certain stuff" in that languages feature list.

On Thu, 14 Oct 2010 16:08:06 +0300, Norbert Nemec <Norbert@nemec-online.de> wrote:

> A language that is adequate for systems programming.
>
> This leaves "adequate" and "systems programming" for definition...
>
>
>
>
> On 10/14/2010 02:30 PM, 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/

I would consider a systems programming language any language that you
can use to build operating systems, even if a little help of assembly
language is
required.


"Norbert Nemec" <Norbert@Nemec-online.de> wrote in message news:i96vcl$11oi$1@digitalmars.com...
>A language that is adequate for systems programming.
>
> This leaves "adequate" and "systems programming" for definition...
>
>
>
>
> On 10/14/2010 02:30 PM, 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.
> 

Paulo Pinto Wrote:

> I would consider a systems programming language any language that you
> can use to build operating systems, even if a little help of assembly
> language is
> required.
> 

I would consider that too but ... Something goes wrong with this :

http://www.jnode.org/


On OS in ASM and Java only (99% Java) ... But Java is not categorized as a systems programming language.

Am 14.10.2010 18:08, schrieb Ezneh:
> Paulo Pinto Wrote:
>
>> I would consider a systems programming language any language that you
>> can use to build operating systems, even if a little help of assembly
>> language is
>> required.
>>
>
> I would consider that too but ... Something goes wrong with this :
>
> http://www.jnode.org/
>
>
> On OS in ASM and Java only (99% Java) ... But Java is not categorized as a systems programming language.
>
>
Why not? What about this?
http://killerstuff.net/publications/device_drivers_in_java_paper_from_qnx.pdf

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.92.1892&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Someone else said that any language with pointers is a systems programming language. So that makes C# a systems programming language or
for that matter Pascal.

For me, if you can write the majority of an OS in a specific language, then you can use it for systems programming.

--
Paulo

On Thu, 14 Oct 2010 23:30:02 +1100, Justin Johansson <no@spam.com> 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".

A system language allows you to:.

+ Use pointers
+ Do manual memory management + Embed assembler
+ Call the operating system syscalls