• Re: Alternatives to C (was Re: Safety of casting from 'long' to 'int')

    From Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson@3:633/10 to All on Fri Aug 21 13:59:49 2026
    On 12/05/2026 9:28 AM, Bart wrote:
    On 10/05/2026 14:05, Dan Cross wrote:
    In article <10tpt9j$c3i4$1@dont-email.me>, Bart˙ <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:
    On 10/05/2026 05:39, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
    [snip]
    What makes you think that I'd need to write an own language given that >>>> there's a plethora of languages of all kinds and paradigms existing.

    So where's the one that works like mine?

    I mean, Rust does exactly what you were just describing.

    Rust could hardly be more different than mine.

    And why are there so many new ones still appearing? Most of them you
    will not know about.

    Consider the possibility that you may be unique in the world in
    possessing the combination of requirements and aesthetic
    judgement that makes you feel you need a language like yours.

    My language fills the same niche that C does.

    I don't have much of a problem with the things that C can do, but with
    how it does it, its syntax, its ancient baggage, its quirks, its
    folklore, its Unix-centric ecosystem, its pointless UBs, its insistence
    in working with every oddball processor, its solving every shortcoming
    with macros, its adherents who will defend every misfeature to the death...

    Maybe the answer is to just create my own language?! I did exactly that,
    and didn't to have to deal with C for 10-15 years, but you can't get
    away from it because it's everywhere.

    It is also frustrating looking at C forums and people thinking they are
    too stupid to grasp something when it's language that could have been better.

    As for new languages, there are a number of reasons.˙ Most of
    them are not particularly relevant here.

    At this point, you may consider doing what Keith suggested, and
    moving further discussion of your language to comp.lang.misc.

    Sure, a pretty much dead group.



    I disagree with Dan Cross, I believe Bart's language should absolutely
    be discussed in comp.lang.c, and I'm keeping comp.lang.misc in this
    discussion for the mentions of Rust.

    Rust is a great programming language to make a C compiler, after all.
    --
    Johann | email: invalid -> com | http://www.myrkraverk.com/blog/
    I'm not from the Internet, I just work there. | via Easynews.com https://bsky.app/profile/myrkraverk.bsky.social | for ( ;; ) _:;

    --- PyGate Linux v1.5.19
    * Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)