Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

GYAST

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-27 17:04

Stands for GYAST is yet another Sepples thread.

We all know that Sepples has very limited practical applications on the client end (device drivers and... games, that's about it). Is there a way to save Sepples from being such a black pit of death as far as the language goes?

I mean, looking at the problems:

1. Ridiculous, cloudy, shoddy, shitty, cluttered, pig-disgusting syntax. And they keep adding MORE to this every single standard revision. Sepples is supposed to provide only basic stuff, okay, I get it - that means you should not have to look up a list to get every single keyword. Furthermore, the stuff they're adding is utterly useless. constexpr, seriously? What about different keywords for the fuckin' 4+ semantic uses of static?

2. That ancient as fuck linking system. Drop backward compatibility already, it's not 19-fucking-70. Using such an ancient linker and requiring all these ridiculous forward/ass-backward declarations is a huge maintenance cost that doesn't need to be there. This should be more like D. This also removes about 90% of the necessity of the preprocessor, and then we can truly keep its use limited.

3. There should at least be minimal garbage collection in terms of exceptions. This isn't a matter of giving up control of the memory, it adds programmer control because you can actually USE exceptions as they were intended to be used.

4. Sepples is a hacked version of See, that needs to go away. They need to start treating it like an independent language, otherwise it's going to forever be shit because of this fact.

Nobody at this point that's still using See sees the benefit in switching, obviously (probably because there aren't many benefits). Nobody's writing See code for Sepples. Just end this tired relationship already. Nobody cares about portable to Sepples from See anymore. They've had plenty of time, they've made their choices, that's that. Move on.

5. The STL. Morph the STL into a standard library. Add things that everyone uses (such as the various classes of smart pointers). Add the standard libraries already (such as cmath, ctime, etc.) as modules of this standard library. This is somewhat like the D suggestion.

Understand that what's needed today isn't minimal, bare-bones languages, but powerful intrinsic features that you can use if you so choose instead of having to waste the resources programming your own.

6. Parsing of templates. There should not be one copy of the same exact class per each source file where it's used.

I'm sure there's more, but you probably see what I'm going for with this.

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-28 19:13

>>33
I never said anything about the STL, and you're a goddamn moron.

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-28 19:31

>>41
Oh, okay, I guess there's some OTHER standard library that I don't know about.

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-28 19:35

>>37
Why not just
#define LOGGED Logger __logobj(__FUNCTION__);
?

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-28 23:15

>>29
nice ... has killer features
Let's not exaggerate here. I was with you up through "usable".

Second, you don't compare C++ to the GC languages like C#, Java, Python, whatever. It has different modus operandi. C++ should be compared to C, because it is C on steroids, it was made to be and it is.
Yes, I damn well do compare it to those languages, because they're competing in the same niche. Sepples is more comparable to them than to C, which is a reasonably good portable assembler.

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-29 0:11

C++ should be compared to C, because it is C on steroids, it was made to be and it is.
and it lacks features that c has had for 10 fucking years.

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-29 2:02

>>45
Name [u]one[/u].

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-29 3:12

>>46
Oh, [/u].

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-29 3:16

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-29 18:42

Bamperu. GYAST reminds me of yeast and gynecology.

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-29 23:41

>>48
Compiles and runs perfectly under G++.

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-30 1:42

>>50
Gepples? Seriously?

Horrible!

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-30 1:57

Gnipples

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-30 1:59

>>50
it shouldn't. that's horribly invalid as sepples code.
unless you're using sepplesox mode, but that's like compiling c code in c1x mode.

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-30 2:08

>>53
Besides the fact that it does compile, and compiles without warnings by changing not more than twenty characters, I would be delighted if you informed me how this example demonstrates something you can do in Se that is not possible in Sepples. That is, how is the exact function of this program- whether or not the actual implementation remains the same, not possible to achieve in Sepples?

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-30 6:53

>>54
yeah, it compiles if you rewrite half of it and make it look like shit.

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-30 11:31

>>54
EXPERT ANAL TOURING

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-30 15:08

EXPERT >>56

>>48
Why would you even want to do that?

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-30 16:00

>>56
That's funny because Alan Turing was gay.

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-30 16:59

>>58
That‘s funny because your gay.

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-30 17:04

>>59
What about my gay?

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-30 17:38

>>60
Hes gay.

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-30 18:31

>>61
His gay is gay? I suppose this makes logical sense.

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-30 23:48

>>62
It's a self-evident statement; a tautology.
And so life imitates art.

Name: Anonymous 2011-05-14 1:10

MORE LIKE
BLACK PIT OF MEMORY LEAKS
AMIRITE LOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLZzz!!11oNE!!1ONE1!

Name: Anonymous 2011-05-14 4:40

>>64
eat dicks, fag

Name: Anonymous 2011-05-14 7:48

SEPPLES

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-19 23:12

/prog/ will be spammed continuously until further notice. we apologize for any inconvenience this may cause.

Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List