Language thoughts 
Author Message
 Language thoughts

If I were looking for something with:

        A rich type system, strongly typed

        Much compile-time checking and analysis for speed and fewer
        bugs

        Native code compilers available for free or cheaply for
        platforms including Win32 and Linux

        Likely to still be very much alive five years from now

        Simple and elegant

...what do people think I should be looking at? Standard libraries to
handle things like ODBC and CORBA would be nice, but not necessary if
I can easily link to C versions.

-- Mark



Mon, 07 Jul 2003 14:50:36 GMT  
 Language thoughts

Quote:

>If I were looking for something with:
>    A rich type system, strongly typed
>    Much compile-time checking and analysis for speed and fewer
>    bugs
>    Native code compilers available for free or cheaply for
>    platforms including Win32 and Linux
>    Likely to still be very much alive five years from now
>        Simple and elegant
>...what do people think I should be looking at? Standard libraries to
>handle things like ODBC and CORBA would be nice, but not necessary if
>I can easily link to C versions.

The following languages fulfil your requirements. Note, however, that
not all compilers may have similar amounts of speed-improving
analyses. Hence, I have for some languages listed some of the better
compilers (in terms of code quality).

SML (SML of New Jersey, ML-Ton)
O'Caml
Haskell (Glasgow Haskell Compiler, HBC)
Clean
Mercury

All of these have been around for 5 years or more, and are likely to
stay for a while. O'Caml, Clean and Mercury are one-compiler
languages, but both SML and Haskell have a multitude of compilers.




Mon, 07 Jul 2003 16:17:36 GMT  
 Language thoughts

Quote:

> If I were looking for something with:

>         A rich type system, strongly typed

>         Much compile-time checking and analysis for speed and fewer
>         bugs

>         Native code compilers available for free or cheaply for
>         platforms including Win32 and Linux

>         Likely to still be very much alive five years from now

>         Simple and elegant

> ...what do people think I should be looking at?

Ada would seem to fit these requirements.


Mon, 07 Jul 2003 17:39:28 GMT  
 Language thoughts
Mark Carroll schreef:

Quote:
> If I were looking for something with:

>         A rich type system, strongly typed

>         Much compile-time checking and analysis for speed and fewer
>         bugs

>         Native code compilers available for free or cheaply for
>         platforms including Win32 and Linux

>         Likely to still be very much alive five years from now

>         Simple and elegant

> ...what do people think I should be looking at? Standard libraries to
> handle things like ODBC and CORBA would be nice, but not necessary if
> I can easily link to C versions.

> -- Mark

Ada 95. Ada has been around since the early 80's. The last revision was
in 95. Widely used for weapon systems, energy technologies and transport
technologies. This illustrates the reliability of the design, the
compilation model and the compilers themselves. Use in weapon system
guarantees that Ada will be around for the next 50 years. Of the many
many dozens of languages I know, the language with the best binding to
Cobol, C, as well as Fortra. Good free compiler (gnat).

Ada fits all your claims.

You also might take a look at Eiffel and the functional languages.

--

Groeten, Karel Th?nissen

Hello Technologies develops high-integrity software for complex systems



Mon, 07 Jul 2003 19:25:47 GMT  
 Language thoughts

I allow myself to add what I think to each point.

Quote:
> If I were looking for something with:

>    A rich type system, strongly typed

Eiffel, Sather, Ada, Modula-2, Modula-3, Oberon, C++ (can)
Ocaml (it's IIRC not O'caml), Haskell, ML.

This languages are either typed via Declarations and or a very
powerful Type system (and often do not have to be declared explicitly)

But a richt type system is too part of
Common Lisp (Lists, Pairs, Alists, Hash-Tables objects etc) but not enforced.

Quote:

>    Much compile-time checking and analysis for speed and fewer
>    bugs

Eiffel, Sather, Modulas and a few other. Even Common Lisps qualify

Quote:

>    Native code compilers available for free or cheaply for
>    platforms including Win32 and Linux

Eiffel, Sather, Modulas, Ocaml, Haskell, C++ and a bunch of others ..

Quote:

>    Likely to still be very much alive five years from now

C++, Eiffel (now 15 year old), Ada, Haskell, Ocaml. I guess all
languages might be avaliable how intensive their living will be sorry
my sphere is broken ;-)

Quote:

>         Simple and elegant

Oh oh, Flame alert ;-)
No judgment. All languages I know have there nice
sides.  I just know, what I do not like but that obviously the
opposite of what I found simple and elegant ;-)

And just others won't understand why I do not find x simple and
elegant ;-)

Quote:

> ...what do people think I should be looking at? Standard libraries to
> handle things like ODBC and CORBA would be nice, but not necessary if
> I can easily link to C versions.

Interfacing to C seem to be in all "higher" level languages. Of course
there are differences, but at least it works ;-)

Regards
Friedrich



Mon, 07 Jul 2003 21:41:03 GMT  
 Language thoughts
Have a look at the Curl Content Language.  http://www.curl.com

disclosure: I work there

Quote:

> If I were looking for something with:

>         A rich type system, strongly typed

check.

Quote:

>         Much compile-time checking and analysis for speed and fewer
>         bugs

check.

Quote:

>         Native code compilers available for free or cheaply for
>         platforms including Win32 and Linux

check for Win32 currently.  Some of the developers use Linux internally,
and the Linux version should be generally available in the first half of
the year.

Quote:

>         Likely to still be very much alive five years from now

Anybody's guess, but look at the founders and investor backing.

Quote:

>         Simple and elegant

From the beginning, one of the explicit goals of the Curl Content
Language has been to unify markup language, scripting, and
object-oriented programming in single model.  A developer previously
familiar with any of these can seemlessly branch into new territory
without experiencing a discontinuous learning-curve, conflicting models,
or "quoting hell".

Quote:

> ...what do people think I should be looking at? Standard libraries to
> handle things like ODBC and CORBA would be nice, but not necessary if
> I can easily link to C versions.

You might look at
 component versioning and distribution,
 integration with web technologies,
 security models


Mon, 07 Jul 2003 22:58:17 GMT  
 Language thoughts
Yes, Ada 95 meets your requirements.  Some people will argue about the
"simple" aspect but if you start by first learning a Pascal-like subset
you will find it simple.  The advanced features (OOP support, tasking,
etc.) are cleanly integrated.  Ada also provides an interface to C as
part of the language standard.

GNAT, the free, open-source GNU Ada compiler for Linux, Windows, and
other platforms is available from ftp://ftp.cs.nyu.edu/pub/gnat/
Information on using Ada with CORBA, COM and other bindings may be found
at http://www.adapower.com

Britt Snodgrass

Quote:

> Mark Carroll schreef:

> > If I were looking for something with:

> >         A rich type system, strongly typed

> >         Much compile-time checking and analysis for speed and fewer
> >         bugs

> >         Native code compilers available for free or cheaply for
> >         platforms including Win32 and Linux

> >         Likely to still be very much alive five years from now

> >         Simple and elegant

> > ...what do people think I should be looking at? Standard libraries to
> > handle things like ODBC and CORBA would be nice, but not necessary if
> > I can easily link to C versions.

> > -- Mark

> Ada 95. Ada has been around since the early 80's. The last revision was
> in 95. Widely used for weapon systems, energy technologies and transport
> technologies. This illustrates the reliability of the design, the
> compilation model and the compilers themselves. Use in weapon system
> guarantees that Ada will be around for the next 50 years. Of the many
> many dozens of languages I know, the language with the best binding to
> Cobol, C, as well as Fortra. Good free compiler (gnat).

> Ada fits all your claims.

> You also might take a look at Eiffel and the functional languages.

> --

> Groeten, Karel Th?nissen

> Hello Technologies develops high-integrity software for complex systems



Mon, 07 Jul 2003 23:35:36 GMT  
 Language thoughts
I also agree that you Ada (95) sounds like a very good match to your
needs.  If you have any further questions I've found that the folks on
comp.lang.ada are quite helpful.

Mike


Quote:

> Yes, Ada 95 meets your requirements.  Some people will argue about the
> "simple" aspect but if you start by first learning a Pascal-like
subset
> you will find it simple.  The advanced features (OOP support, tasking,
> etc.) are cleanly integrated.  Ada also provides an interface to C as
> part of the language standard.

> GNAT, the free, open-source GNU Ada compiler for Linux, Windows, and
> other platforms is available from ftp://ftp.cs.nyu.edu/pub/gnat/
> Information on using Ada with CORBA, COM and other bindings may be
found
> at http://www.adapower.com

> Britt Snodgrass


> > Mark Carroll schreef:

> > > If I were looking for something with:

> > >         A rich type system, strongly typed

> > >         Much compile-time checking and analysis for speed and
fewer
> > >         bugs

> > >         Native code compilers available for free or cheaply for
> > >         platforms including Win32 and Linux

> > >         Likely to still be very much alive five years from now

> > >         Simple and elegant

> > > ...what do people think I should be looking at? Standard
libraries to
> > > handle things like ODBC and CORBA would be nice, but not
necessary if
> > > I can easily link to C versions.

> > > -- Mark

> > Ada 95. Ada has been around since the early 80's. The last revision
was
> > in 95. Widely used for weapon systems, energy technologies and
transport
> > technologies. This illustrates the reliability of the design, the
> > compilation model and the compilers themselves. Use in weapon system
> > guarantees that Ada will be around for the next 50 years. Of the
many
> > many dozens of languages I know, the language with the best binding
to
> > Cobol, C, as well as Fortra. Good free compiler (gnat).

> > Ada fits all your claims.

> > You also might take a look at Eiffel and the functional languages.

> > --

> > Groeten, Karel Th?nissen

> > Hello Technologies develops high-integrity software for complex
systems

Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/


Tue, 08 Jul 2003 05:15:52 GMT  
 Language thoughts
Wow - thanks very much, people - that was all more helpful and
plausible than I expected. I'll do some posting on language-specific
newsgroups, then report back. (-:

-- Mark



Tue, 08 Jul 2003 10:30:30 GMT  
 Language thoughts


Quote:
>Yes, Ada 95 meets your requirements.  Some people will argue about the
>"simple" aspect but if you start by first learning a Pascal-like subset
>you will find it simple.  [...]

        If any language that contains a [cleanish] Pascal-like
subset is to be claimed as "simple", are there any complicated
languages, apart perhaps from Cobol?

--
Andy Walker, School of MathSci., Univ. of Nott'm, UK.



Tue, 08 Jul 2003 20:42:09 GMT  
 Language thoughts


Quote:


>>Yes, Ada 95 meets your requirements.  Some people will argue about the
>>"simple" aspect but if you start by first learning a Pascal-like subset
>>you will find it simple.  [...]

>    If any language that contains a [cleanish] Pascal-like
>subset is to be claimed as "simple", are there any complicated
>languages, apart perhaps from Cobol?

(-: I guess that it's more needless complexity I'm trying to avoid -
to some extent, I suppose one probably has to trade off simplicity
with power, but I bet not many languages do that very well - i.e. that
some other similarly powerful or more powerful language exists which
is simpler. I think Modula-3 strikes a good balance, though I could
live without SUBARRAY, packed types, etc.; I presume that M3 contains
a [cleanish] Pascal-like subset?

-- Mark



Tue, 08 Jul 2003 21:13:04 GMT  
 Language thoughts

Quote:
>         If any language that contains a [cleanish] Pascal-like
> subset is to be claimed as "simple", are there any complicated
> languages, apart perhaps from Cobol?

C++? (Some introductory books are 1000 - 1200 pages long, and there's
a book on a subset that gives as its motivation the author's hearing
of the language's creator not realizing an obscure feature interaction
until it was pointed out.)

        James Jones

Opinions herein are those of the author, and not necessarily those
of any organization.



Wed, 09 Jul 2003 00:21:50 GMT  
 Language thoughts

Quote:
>    If any language that contains a [cleanish] Pascal-like
>subset is to be claimed as "simple", are there any complicated
>languages, apart perhaps from Cobol?

PL/1 is the obvious candidate.

You may remember the quote from Mark Rain:
        ALGOL 68 is complex;
        PL/1 is complicated.

--
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------

Voice/Fax: +44 161 436 6131      Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9     Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5



Fri, 11 Jul 2003 23:25:51 GMT  
 Language thoughts
On Fri, 19 Jan 2001 10:21:50 -0600, James Jones

Quote:


>>         If any language that contains a [cleanish] Pascal-like
>> subset is to be claimed as "simple", are there any complicated
>> languages, apart perhaps from Cobol?

>C++? (Some introductory books are 1000 - 1200 pages long, and there's
>a book on a subset that gives as its motivation the author's hearing
>of the language's creator not realizing an obscure feature interaction
>until it was pointed out.)

Agreed. When I'm asked to list large languages (usually after
mentioning that some other language is small), I always mention C++
and COBOL in the same breath.

IMHO they have other things in common, too, but that's the stuff of
flamebait, not a productive discussion. ;-)

--Eric

+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| "I have come a very long way from myself only to realize that     |
| identity is a skill and self-betrayal is a habit. Once lost, the  |
| former is very hard to regain; once gained, the latter is very    |
| hard to lose."  ---I. Corvus, _The Europe of Our Dreams_          |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
       Visit sunny Barycenter at: http://barycenter.dyndns.org



Sun, 13 Jul 2003 04:38:14 GMT  
 Language thoughts
Sounds just like python, although it's interpreted instead of compiled, and
it's easy to learn.>www.python.org

If I were looking for something with:

Quote:

>    A rich type system, strongly typed

>    Much compile-time checking and analysis for speed and fewer
>    bugs

>    Native code compilers available for free or cheaply for
>    platforms including Win32 and Linux

>    Likely to still be very much alive five years from now

>        Simple and elegant

>...what do people think I should be looking at? Standard libraries to
>handle things like ODBC and CORBA would be nice, but not necessary if
>I can easily link to C versions.

>-- Mark



Sun, 20 Jul 2003 15:13:58 GMT  
 
 [ 17 post ]  Go to page: [1] [2]

 Relevant Pages 

1. looking for info ref OLD computer language thought to run on IBM

2. looking for info ref OLD computer language thought to run on IBM

3. The Sather Language: Experiences/Thoughts

4. Yet Another Scripting Language - Syntax thoughts

5. Thoughts on (yet another ) scripting language

6. Effect of programming languages on thought

7. Effect of programming languages on thought

8. A well thought of language

9. Thoughts about extensions to the Python language

10. Thoughts on the standard process and language evolution.

11. Some thoughts about Python, python.org and non-English languages

12. Novel Thoughts on Scripting and Languages

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software