Re: Time for a new language?

From	BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.misc, comp.programming
Subject	Re: Time for a new language?
Date	2011-06-07 03:07 -0700
Organization	albasani.net
Message-ID	<4DEDF86E.5020605@hotmail.com> (permalink)
References	<isir0b$246$2@speranza.aioe.org> <27f391e528bef754bbbe3b05f7241046@dizum.com> <isjhsq$vt8$1@speranza.aioe.org> <043628bb-8b8b-4094-8e7b-b1c61a69b525@c41g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On 6/7/2011 1:17 AM, tm wrote:
> On 6 Jun., 23:47, "Tony"<nos...@myisp.net>  wrote:
>> Nomen Nescio wrote:
>>> "Tony"<nos...@myisp.net>  wrote:
>>
>>>> Jacko wrote:
>>
>>>>> long arr = new long[256,-2]; should be more than sufficient,
>>
>>>> Of course it isn't. You are ignoring the fact that memory footprint
>>>> and layout matters sometimes. Either that or you are making a very
>>>> HLL, something above the level of C and C++, something at the level
>>>> of scripting languages.
>>
>>> Since when are C or C++ HLLs? I think it goes approximately like this
>>
>>> microcode ->  object code ->  assembler ->  c ->  c++ ->  HLL ->  Java ->
>>> scripting lang
>>
>> I have always understood and used "HLL" to mean "above assembly
>> language". I put C and C++ at the same level. How could one not? That a
>> language has more features than another does not put it at a different
>> level. Assembly is the LLL and I don't have to worry about anything
>> lower. Example:
>>
>> Low Level: Assembly Language
>> High Level: C, C++, Java (but a different animal from C, C++)
>> Higher Level: Scripting Languages
>
> Sripting Languages is a coarse description of a goup of languages.
> They tend to be interpreted and dynamically typed, but this is not
> granted. The only thing that they really have in common is the name
> "Scripting Language". There is no reason to consider all languages
> with this label "Higher Level".
>
> The term "Higher Level" often includes subjective feelings. People
> tend to consider things they like "Higher Level" and things they
> don't like "Lower Level". Because of such things an explanation is
> needed to show why something is considered higher level.
>
> I consider Seed7 higher level than Java and C++ because Seed7
> defines things in libraries that Java and C++ have hard-coded in
> their compilers. So I consider arrays defined with an abstract data
> type as higher level than hard-coded arrays.
>
> To see how hard-coded things work, look at the C conversions for
> numeric values. Chapter A6 of ANSI-K&R distinguishes between:
>    Intergral Promotion
>    Integral Converions
>    Integer and Floating
>    Floating Types
>    Arithmetic Conversions
>    Pointers and Integers
> The rules are not simple, and they changed between K&R-C and ANSI-C.
> All this rules are hardcoded in every C compiler. Seed7 has no such
> rules. There are just definitions of operators and functions for
> numeric types. I consider that this simplification makes Seed7
> (besides other things) higher level than C.
>
> I consider things, that everybody can define, as higher level than
> hard-coded do what I mean concepts (that only authors of compilers
> and interpreters can change).
>

and, in my current scripting language, currently more stuff is 
hard-coded into the VM than in Java...


I disagree though that it makes it inherently lower-level though. just 
that the present main strategy is to implement things in C, and plug 
things into the VM (a lot is also done via vtables and callbacks).

this does make it easier for C code to extend/customize the VM, just 
this isn't so readily available for HLL code.

for example, many "Object" methods, such as "toString()" are infact 
special-case logic, which is redirected through C-side vtable structures 
by the VM (may redirect back to object methods for some types, such as 
Class/Instance objects).

others, such as "clone()", are handled by VM bytecodes. "toString()" 
could also be made into a bytecoded operation, FWIW.

strings themselves are pretty much entirely built-in types.
...


recently I also added new syntax for literal fixed type arrays:
"[1,2,3]UB" creates a 3 element array of unsigned bytes (this seemed 
like the "least nasty" solution).

as well as adding basic VM support for "value types" (could be used for 
"structs" or similar, and for other pass-by-value stuff).


or such...

Thread

Re: Time for a new language? Jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2011-05-03 18:58 -0700
  Re: Time for a new language? "Tony" <nospam@myisp.net> - 2011-06-06 10:16 -0500
    Re: Time for a new language? Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2011-06-06 21:45 +0200
      Re: Time for a new language? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-06 13:10 -0700
        Re: Time for a new language? Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201106.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2011-06-08 14:09 +0200
          Re: Time for a new language? "Tony" <nospam@myisp.net> - 2011-06-08 12:56 -0500
            Re: Time for a new language? Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2011-06-09 02:31 +0200
              Re: Time for a new language? "Tony" <nospam@myisp.net> - 2011-06-09 09:10 -0500
              Re: Time for a new language? cri@tiac.net (Richard Harter) - 2011-06-09 16:37 +0000
                Re: Time for a new language? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-09 10:39 -0700
                Re: Time for a new language? tm <thomas.mertes@gmx.at> - 2011-06-10 04:46 -0700
                Re: Time for a new language? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-10 12:15 -0700
          Re: Time for a new language? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-08 11:03 -0700
      Re: Time for a new language? "Tony" <nospam@myisp.net> - 2011-06-06 16:47 -0500
        Re: Time for a new language? tm <thomas.mertes@gmx.at> - 2011-06-07 01:17 -0700
          Re: Time for a new language? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-07 03:07 -0700
            Re: Time for a new language? tm <thomas.mertes@gmx.at> - 2011-06-07 04:21 -0700
          Re: Time for a new language? "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2011-06-07 11:26 +0100
            Re: Time for a new language? pete <pfiland@mindspring.com> - 2011-06-07 07:45 -0400
              Re: Time for a new language? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-07 13:02 -0700
            Re: Time for a new language? tm <thomas.mertes@gmx.at> - 2011-06-07 12:49 -0700
          Re: Time for a new language? gremnebulin <peterdjones@yahoo.com> - 2011-06-13 16:36 -0700
          Re: Time for a new language? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-17 10:25 +1200
            Re: Time for a new language? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-16 23:11 -0700
              Re: Time for a new language? tm <thomas.mertes@gmx.at> - 2011-06-17 01:39 -0700
                Re: Time for a new language? "H.J. Sander Bruggink" <sander.bruggink@uni-due.de> - 2011-06-17 11:05 +0200
                Re: Time for a new language? tm <thomas.mertes@gmx.at> - 2011-06-17 02:54 -0700
                Re: Time for a new language? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-17 10:55 -0700
            Re: Time for a new language? tm <thomas.mertes@gmx.at> - 2011-06-17 00:55 -0700
        Re: Time for a new language? Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201106.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2011-06-08 23:54 +0200
          Re: Time for a new language? "Tony" <nospam@myisp.net> - 2011-06-08 17:37 -0500
        Re: Time for a new language? Marco van de Voort <marcov@turtle.stack.nl> - 2011-06-14 10:23 +0000
        Re: Time for a new language? torbenm@diku.dk (Torben Ægidius Mogensen) - 2011-06-14 16:45 +0200
          Re: Time for a new language? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-14 15:11 -0700
          Re: Time for a new language? "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-06-15 01:41 -0400
            Re: Time for a new language? Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2011-06-15 15:40 +0200
          Re: Time for a new language? Marco van de Voort <marcov@turtle.stack.nl> - 2011-06-16 09:32 +0000
            Re: Time for a new language? Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201106.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2011-06-17 03:25 +0200
              Re: Time for a new language? Marco van de Voort <marcov@turtle.stack.nl> - 2011-06-17 08:38 +0000
                Re: Time for a new language? "Tony" <nospam@myisp.net> - 2011-06-17 07:42 -0500
                Re: Time for a new language? Marco van de Voort <marcov@turtle.stack.nl> - 2011-06-17 12:59 +0000
                Re: Time for a new language? "Tony" <nospam@myisp.net> - 2011-06-17 08:48 -0500
                Re: Time for a new language? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-17 14:07 -0700
                Re: Time for a new language? Marco van de Voort <marcov@turtle.stack.nl> - 2011-06-19 15:57 +0000
                Re: Time for a new language? "Tony" <nospam@myisp.net> - 2011-06-20 13:21 -0500
                Re: Time for a new language? Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201106.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2011-06-17 22:10 +0200
                Re: Time for a new language? "Tony" <nospam@myisp.net> - 2011-06-17 07:47 -0500
                Re: Time for a new language? Marco van de Voort <marcov@turtle.stack.nl> - 2011-06-17 13:02 +0000
                Re: Time for a new language? "Tony" <nospam@myisp.net> - 2011-06-17 09:06 -0500
                Re: Time for a new language? "Tony" <nospam@myisp.net> - 2011-06-17 07:53 -0500
                Re: Time for a new language? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-17 13:37 -0700
                Re: Time for a new language? Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2011-06-17 19:25 +0200
                Re: Time for a new language? Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201106.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2011-06-22 09:41 +0200
                Re: Time for a new language? torbenm@diku.dk (Torben Ægidius Mogensen) - 2011-06-22 11:06 +0200
                Re: Time for a new language? Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2011-06-22 19:30 +0200
                Re: Time for a new language? "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2011-06-22 10:21 +0100
              Re: Time for a new language? "Tony" <nospam@myisp.net> - 2011-06-17 07:37 -0500
                Re: Time for a new language? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-17 11:18 -0700

csiph-web