Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #74654 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Chad <cdalten@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-11-02 08:05 -0800 |
| Last post | 2015-11-10 16:31 +0000 |
| Articles | 11 on this page of 111 — 25 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c
What's the purpose of CAlive? Chad <cdalten@gmail.com> - 2015-11-02 08:05 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-11-02 16:08 +0000
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Jay Braun <lyngwyst@gmail.com> - 2015-11-02 08:18 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-02 09:00 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-02 08:50 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Johannes Bauer <dfnsonfsduifb@gmx.de> - 2015-11-05 14:36 +0100
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-05 05:55 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Johannes Bauer <dfnsonfsduifb@gmx.de> - 2015-11-06 11:57 +0100
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-11-06 11:20 +0000
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-11-06 11:45 +0000
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-11-06 12:03 +0000
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-11-06 13:34 +0000
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-11-06 14:35 +0000
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Johannes Bauer <dfnsonfsduifb@gmx.de> - 2015-11-06 15:43 +0100
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-06 07:05 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-11-06 15:15 +0000
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-11-06 08:34 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-07 00:24 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2015-11-05 21:33 -0700
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Johannes Bauer <dfnsonfsduifb@gmx.de> - 2015-11-06 11:54 +0100
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-11-06 12:01 +0000
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-11-06 14:11 +0100
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-11-10 16:17 +0000
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-10 08:24 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2015-11-17 14:51 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-11-18 01:18 +0000
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Chad <cdalten@gmail.com> - 2015-11-17 21:06 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-18 02:34 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? mark.bluemel@gmail.com - 2015-11-18 03:36 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-18 04:02 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-18 06:14 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-18 06:18 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2015-11-18 19:07 +0000
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-18 11:14 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2015-11-19 11:27 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? August Karlstrom <fusionfile@gmail.com> - 2015-11-05 21:57 +0100
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-05 13:06 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-11-05 22:12 +0100
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-11-05 13:24 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-05 13:27 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-11-06 13:51 +0100
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-05 13:25 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-11-06 14:00 +0100
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-06 05:14 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-11-06 13:33 +0000
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-11-06 14:14 +0000
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-06 06:28 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-06 06:52 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-11-06 08:45 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-05 15:43 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Chad <cdalten@gmail.com> - 2015-11-05 15:59 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-05 16:11 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-05 16:35 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-05 16:12 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-05 20:28 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-05 20:40 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-05 21:02 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-05 21:53 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Chad <cdalten@gmail.com> - 2015-11-05 23:43 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-06 03:27 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-11-07 10:51 +1300
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-06 14:04 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2015-11-07 13:33 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 14:00 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-11-08 11:26 +1300
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 14:33 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-07 14:45 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 14:58 -0800
[way OT] Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-11-08 14:05 +1300
Re: [way OT] Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-08 00:05 -0800
Re: [way OT] Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-11-08 21:44 +1300
Re: [way OT] Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-11-10 16:22 +0000
Re: [way OT] Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-08 07:06 -0600
Re: [way OT] Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? asetofsymbols@gmail.com - 2015-11-08 06:02 -0800
Re: [way OT] Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-08 07:45 -0800
Re: [way OT] Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-08 09:40 -0800
Re: [way OT] Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-08 11:32 -0800
Re: [way OT] Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-08 11:43 -0800
Re: [way OT] Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-11-08 21:14 +0100
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-11-07 15:07 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 15:14 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-11-10 16:27 +0000
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-10 08:35 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-11-10 09:05 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-11-07 23:18 +0000
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-11-10 16:20 +0000
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-10 08:28 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-11-07 23:20 +0000
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 15:41 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2015-11-07 16:13 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 16:20 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 16:27 -0800
Bartenders? (Was: What's the purpose of CAlive?) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-11-08 01:25 +0000
Re: Bartenders? (Was: What's the purpose of CAlive?) "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 17:54 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-07 16:01 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 16:05 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2015-11-07 16:08 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Reinhardt Behm <rbehm@hushmail.com> - 2015-11-08 09:59 +0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-11-06 10:50 +0000
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-11-06 10:54 +0000
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-07 00:37 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-11-07 10:00 +0000
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? bartekltg <bartekltg@gmail.com> - 2015-11-06 15:01 +0100
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-06 08:12 -0600
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? bartekltg <bartekltg@gmail.com> - 2015-11-06 19:29 +0100
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? August Karlstrom <fusionfile@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 09:33 +0100
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-07 01:47 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-06 06:20 -0800
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-11-06 16:24 +0000
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? bartekltg <bartekltg@gmail.com> - 2015-11-06 19:41 +0100
Re: What's the purpose of CAlive? raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-11-10 16:31 +0000
Page 6 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6]
| From | Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 00:37 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <77d39b68-3f41-4939-b035-454ea68cf432@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #75062 |
On Friday, November 6, 2015 at 10:54:38 AM UTC, Kenny McCormack wrote: > > That hardly matters, given that Jacob is not a Christian. > > Do we know at this point whether or not Hans Boehm is a Christian? > His homepage is semi-protected. You have to know the first names of his children. But since he uses the term "first name" he's probably not a very dedicated Christian. See what you can derive from very limited information.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 10:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <n1ki47$mjc$1@news.xmission.com> |
| In reply to | #75228 |
In article <77d39b68-3f41-4939-b035-454ea68cf432@googlegroups.com>, Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> wrote: >On Friday, November 6, 2015 at 10:54:38 AM UTC, Kenny McCormack wrote: >> >> That hardly matters, given that Jacob is not a Christian. >> >> Do we know at this point whether or not Hans Boehm is a Christian? >> >His homepage is semi-protected. You have to know the first names of his >children. But since he uses the term "first name" he's probably not a >very dedicated Christian. >See what you can derive from very limited information. Well done, sir! -- To most Christians, the Bible is like a software license. Nobody actually reads it. They just scroll to the bottom and click "I agree." - author unknown -
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bartekltg <bartekltg@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-06 15:01 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <n1ibri$efr$1@node1.news.atman.pl> |
| In reply to | #75018 |
On 05.11.2015 22:06, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: > On Thursday, November 5, 2015 at 3:57:51 PM UTC-5, August Karlstrom wrote: >> On 2015-11-02 17:50, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: >>> On Monday, November 2, 2015 at 11:06:12 AM UTC-5, Chad wrote: >>>> Is it supposed to fix the shortcomings in C? >>> >>> CAlive is my C-like language offering unto Jesus Christ, part of my vision >>> for the Liberty Software Foundation, and Village Freedom Project. It aims >>> to be a largely C-compatible language, but with some of the new features >>> the Lord has given me insight to, and one built atop faith in Jesus Christ. >> >> Hopefully it will not turn into a flying spaghetti monster like C++. > > Amen to that! :-) > > ----- > CAlive will add support for the basic class, exceptions, and some of > the relaxed syntax requirements, though it will keep C's weaker > pointer type checking (producing only warnings, not errors). > > Those are my starting points. If someone can make a great argument > as to why other C++ features should be added, I will consider it. So why don't just use c++? You do not have to use all c++ features. And, despite popular opinion, c++ wasn't created for the glory of Cthulhu, as a tribute for his testicles, allegedly represented by convoluted language structures. bartekltg
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-06 08:12 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <da3qqqFnetbU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #75097 |
"bartekltg" wrote: > So why don't just use c++? You do not have to use all c++ features. Try the following analogy. Take all the natural languages on the planet, English, Spanish, Mandarin, ... and combine them into a new language called Ultimate. No one has enough neurons or patience so that two people can converse fluently in Ultimate. It's not a new problem, PL\1 was a less similar, but less grandiose thing. It was a blending of Fortran Cobol and Algol.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bartekltg <bartekltg@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-06 19:29 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <n1iril$qi0$1@node2.news.atman.pl> |
| In reply to | #75098 |
On 06.11.2015 15:12, Osmium wrote: > "bartekltg" wrote: > >> So why don't just use c++? You do not have to use all c++ features. > > Try the following analogy. Take all the natural languages on the > planet, English, Spanish, Mandarin, ... and combine them into a new > language called Ultimate. > > No one has enough neurons or patience so that two people can converse > fluently in Ultimate. It's not a new problem, Joke for joke, seems fair... bartekltg
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | August Karlstrom <fusionfile@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 09:33 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <n1kd0h$q0f$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #75098 |
On 2015-11-06 15:12, Osmium wrote: > "bartekltg" wrote: > >> So why don't just use c++? You do not have to use all c++ features. > > Try the following analogy. Take all the natural languages on the > planet, English, Spanish, Mandarin, ... and combine them into a new > language called Ultimate. > > No one has enough neurons or patience so that two people can converse > fluently in Ultimate. It's not a new problem, PL\1 was a less similar, > but less grandiose thing. It was a blending of Fortran Cobol and Algol. From Edsger Dijkstra's ACM Turing Award speech: "Finally, although the subject is not a pleasant one, I must mention PL/1, a programming language for which the defining documentation is of a frightening size and complexity. Using PL/1 must be like flying a plane with 7000 buttons, switches and handles to manipulate in the cockpit. I absolutely fail to see how we can keep our growing programs firmly within our intellectual grip when by its sheer baroqueness the programming language —our basic tool, mind you!— already escapes our intellectual control. And if I have to describe the influence PL/1 can have on its users, the closest metaphor that comes to my mind is that of a drug. I remember from a symposium on higher level programming language a lecture given in defense of PL/1 by a man who described himself as one of its devoted users. But within a one-hour lecture in praise of PL/1. he managed to ask for the addition of about fifty new “features”, little supposing that the main source of his problems could very well be that it contained already far too many “features”. The speaker displayed all the depressing symptoms of addiction, reduced as he was to the state of mental stagnation in which he could only ask for more, more, more... When FORTRAN has been called an infantile disorder, full PL/1, with its growth characteristics of a dangerous tumor, could turn out to be a fatal disease." https://www.cs.utexas.edu/~EWD/transcriptions/EWD03xx/EWD340.html -- August
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 01:47 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <0bcc23de-8073-44d2-8a8e-8dee1e818731@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #75226 |
On Saturday, November 7, 2015 at 8:33:31 AM UTC, August Karlstrom wrote: > > "Finally, although the subject is not a pleasant one, I must mention > PL/1, a programming language for which the defining documentation is of > a frightening size and complexity. Using PL/1 must be like flying a > plane with 7000 buttons, switches and handles to manipulate in the > cockpit. I absolutely fail to see how we can keep our growing programs > firmly within our intellectual grip when by its sheer baroqueness the > programming language --our basic tool, mind you!-- already escapes our > intellectual control. And if I have to describe the influence PL/1 can > have on its users, the closest metaphor that comes to my mind is that of > a drug. I remember from a symposium on higher level programming language > a lecture given in defense of PL/1 by a man who described himself as one > of its devoted users. But within a one-hour lecture in praise of PL/1. > he managed to ask for the addition of about fifty new "features", little > supposing that the main source of his problems could very well be that > it contained already far too many "features". The speaker displayed all > the depressing symptoms of addiction, reduced as he was to the state of > mental stagnation in which he could only ask for more, more, more... > When FORTRAN has been called an infantile disorder, full PL/1, with its > growth characteristics of a dangerous tumor, could turn out to be a > fatal disease." > Absolutely right. C is quite simple. But it needs more simplification rather than more complexities added.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-06 06:20 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <a9e5cd0c-0232-443b-bc4c-ee0903b834b8@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #75097 |
On Friday, November 6, 2015 at 9:01:29 AM UTC-5, bartekltg wrote:
> On 05.11.2015 22:06, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> > On Thursday, November 5, 2015 at 3:57:51 PM UTC-5, August Karlstrom wrote:
> >> On 2015-11-02 17:50, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> >>> On Monday, November 2, 2015 at 11:06:12 AM UTC-5, Chad wrote:
> >>>> Is it supposed to fix the shortcomings in C?
> >>>
> >>> CAlive is my C-like language offering unto Jesus Christ, part of my vision
> >>> for the Liberty Software Foundation, and Village Freedom Project. It aims
> >>> to be a largely C-compatible language, but with some of the new features
> >>> the Lord has given me insight to, and one built atop faith in Jesus Christ.
> >>
> >> Hopefully it will not turn into a flying spaghetti monster like C++.
> >
> > Amen to that! :-)
> >
> > -----
> > CAlive will add support for the basic class, exceptions, and some of
> > the relaxed syntax requirements, though it will keep C's weaker
> > pointer type checking (producing only warnings, not errors).
> >
> > Those are my starting points. If someone can make a great argument
> > as to why other C++ features should be added, I will consider it.
>
> So why don't just use c++? You do not have to use all c++ features.
For the same reasons I cannot contribute to GNU or Linux -- I've
examined the spirit of their founders / leaders, and they are of
the world. Richard Stallman of GNU and FSF, Linus Torvalds of Linux,
and Bjarne Stroustrup of C++ ... they are all operating in ways which
wholly target the world's ways of looking at things. They are in no
way targeting anything related to Jesus Christ, His Kingdom, or of
His Holy Spirit.
I cannot participate in adding to such things, so I am working on
Godly alternatives.
-----
It is my hope and prayer that other devout Christians will come on
board and offer their skills and talents to help me complete these
tasks.
It took me from July 12, 2012 through March 8, 2015 before the first
software developer came on board to help me out with Visual FreePro.
In fact, it was exactly 969 days when it happened, which I found
interesting was the number of the year age of Methuselah in the Bible
when he died, and the flood came. That support also came at a point
when I was considering throwing in the towel because I had concluded
after so long and no developer help that it was not something God
wanted me pursuing. I was to the point in my prayers of saying, "I
tried, Lord. I honestly tried. I just pray that I did not operate
against your will during this time, but I am now prepared to go in
whatever way you guide." And it was within days of that prayer that
I received my first real C/C++ help (another devout Christian had
helped me back in late 2012 and early 2013 with the wiki and some
other non-coding things).
-----
As of Oct.18.2015, that developer has contributed 69 separate functions
to the Visual FreePro, Jr. programming language, bringing the total
number of functions completed up to 178:
http://www.visual-freepro.org/wiki/index.php/VXB#Contributions
So now I am wondering how long it will be until a developer comes on
board to help me work on RDC and CAlive. Since they are completely
new designs, I imagine it will be like what happened with Visual
FreePro, Jr. I had to get things to a certain point before people
would consider helping out. My latest public release prior to that
developer coming on board, for example, had all of the drawing
algorithms completed, an object hierarchy, and a largely developed
IDE design:
http://www.visual-freepro.org/images/vjr_055.png
I'd imagine I'll have to have the language defined, my book completed,
and a lot of the front-end (what I call) parsing and dictionary logic
created, before there will be enough for people to see tangibly and
then come and offer help.
I pray I'm wrong about that though, and that help comes much sooner.
Best regards,
Rick C. Hodgin
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-06 16:24 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <563cd400.28623828@news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #75097 |
bartekltg <bartekltg@gmail.com> wrote: > On 05.11.2015 22:06, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: > > Those are my starting points. If someone can make a great argument > > as to why other C++ features should be added, I will consider it. > > So why don't just use c++? You do not have to use all c++ features. Because then he'd have to admit that turning C into C++ _again_ will only lead to C++ _again_. > And, despite popular opinion, c++ wasn't created for the glory > of Cthulhu, as a tribute for his testicles, allegedly > represented by convoluted language structures. Well, of course not! Para-molluscs from the non-Euclidian angles of outer space don't even have testicles, they spawn autosexually... Richard
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bartekltg <bartekltg@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-06 19:41 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <n1is9h$rd4$1@node2.news.atman.pl> |
| In reply to | #75114 |
On 06.11.2015 17:24, Richard Bos wrote: > bartekltg <bartekltg@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 05.11.2015 22:06, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: >>> Those are my starting points. If someone can make a great argument >>> as to why other C++ features should be added, I will consider it. >> >> So why don't just use c++? You do not have to use all c++ features. > > Because then he'd have to admit that turning C into C++ _again_ will > only lead to C++ _again_. I think I don't understand. >> And, despite popular opinion, c++ wasn't created for the glory >> of Cthulhu, as a tribute for his testicles, allegedly >> represented by convoluted language structures. > > Well, of course not! Para-molluscs from the non-Euclidian angles of > outer space don't even have testicles, they spawn autosexually... The madness bothered me and corrupted this post. I wanted to write "tentacles". Uncountable number of tangle tentacles. Like c++, according to many people:-) [resisting a temptation to spam Stroustrup's talks/papers about sane, pretty and coherent subset... ] bartekltg
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-10 16:31 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <56421bc8.6413046@news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #75153 |
bartekltg <bartekltg@gmail.com> wrote: > On 06.11.2015 17:24, Richard Bos wrote: > > bartekltg <bartekltg@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> And, despite popular opinion, c++ wasn't created for the glory > >> of Cthulhu, as a tribute for his testicles, allegedly > >> represented by convoluted language structures. > > > > Well, of course not! Para-molluscs from the non-Euclidian angles of > > outer space don't even have testicles, they spawn autosexually... > > The madness bothered me and corrupted this post. I wanted to write "tentacles". > Uncountable number of tangle tentacles. Like c++, according to many people:-) Well, yes. Although it's not the worst case. That would be Perl. Richard
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 6 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6]
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web