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

Pages: 1-

C++ alternative

Name: Anonymous 2011-04-09 11:01

If "Sepples" sucks so bad as you think, what alternatives are there?
(except garbage collected toy languages)

Name: Anonymous 2011-04-09 11:09

>>1
Python.

Name: Anonymous 2011-04-09 11:11

Try with D. It's an awesome language. Unfortunately it's not very used, and that's basically because it's somehow shadowed by the popularity of C++.

Name: Anonymous 2011-04-09 11:13

Ruby, Smalltalk

Name: Anonymous 2011-04-09 11:24

C

Name: Anonymous 2011-04-09 11:25

C#

Name: Anonymous 2011-04-09 11:59

>>2-4,6
Garbage collected
>>5
Already part of C++

Name: Anonymous 2011-04-09 12:03

>>7
What is your problem with the garbage collection? Oh I see

Once, somebody made a garbage collector for C++. They abandoned the project when it collected the whole language.

Name: VIPPER 2011-04-09 15:50

JEWS

Name: VIPPER 2011-04-09 15:53

JEWS

Name: VIPPER 2011-04-09 15:55

JEWS

Name: VIPPER 2011-04-09 15:57

JEWS

Name: VIPPER 2011-04-09 15:59

JEWS

Name: Anonymous 2011-04-09 18:04

Lisp

Name: Anonymous 2011-04-09 19:03

You ma try Haskell, it's powerful, can be interpreted or compiled and is statically typed, just as C++

Name: nambla_dot_org 2011-04-09 19:06

Haskell tends to be a bit too much for retards that never made it beyond high school Calculus.

Name: Anonymous 2011-04-09 19:07

>>7
C is garbage collected?

Name: Anonymous 2011-04-09 19:09

>>17
Read again, carefully.

Name: nambla_dot__org 2011-04-09 19:10

>>17
Don't you have the mental capacity to read the c89 and c99 in order to find out?

Name: nambla_dot_org 2011-04-09 19:12

>>18
Okay, I've come to the conclusion that you are an autistic jew.

Name: NIGGERFUCK 2011-04-10 1:07

#include <stdio.h>
#define NIGGERFUCK "niggerfuck"

int main() {
  printf("Hi %s", NIGGERFUCK);
  return 0;}

Name: Anonymous 2011-04-10 1:35

C and C++ are NOT garbage collected languages, not out of the box anyway. The standards merely allow for compiler/library implementors to support a garbage collected memory model through third-party defined interfaces. No C/C++ compiler that I am aware of have explicit support for garbage collection out-of-the-box. You can download and use third party garbage collection frameworks like ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boehm_garbage_collector ) that override new/delete operators and have their own malloc/free implementations, but it's not something that GCC, MSVC++, Intel C++, Clang, etc. support as a compiler switch, it's just a library you link to.

I'm tired of the people on this board claiming that C/C++ are garbage collected. They aren't really, it's just that the memory model is so broad that it's possible to implement a GC environment inside of it.

Name: Anonymous 2011-04-10 2:28

>>22
The standards merely allow for compiler/library implementors to support a garbage collected memory model through third-party defined interfaces.
http://www2.research.att.com/~bs/C++0xFAQ.html#gc-abi

Name: Anonymous 2011-04-10 5:25

Garbage collection (automatic recycling of unreferenced regions of memory) is optional in C++; that is, a garbage collector is not a compulsory part of an implementation. However, C++0x provides a definition of what a GC can do if one is used and an ABI (Application Binary Interface) to help control its actions.

Like I said, no current C++ compiler supports GC out of the box. Not even GCC. The memory model allows for GCC, and Bjarne refers to it as an ABI, but that's not what it's called in the actual standard specification. In fact, the term ABI is not even mentioned AT ALL.

The memory model, pointer semantics and aliasing rules are broad enough to allow for garbage collection, without actually mentioning the term "garbage collection."

See section 3.7.4.3:

http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2011/n3242.pdf

In fact, the actual standard document only mentions the term "garbage collection" once in a ancillary note about how implementors can relax the rules for malloc/free for existing C interoperation, at the cost of not being able to implement "garbage collection." Search the PDF yourself if you don't believe me.

No C/C++ compiler will ever implement garbage collection, because quite frankly it over-complicates implementations and it's something no experienced C or C++ programmer will ever bother using.

Name: Anonymous 2011-04-10 5:33

>>24
Is it at least Turing-complete?

Name: Anonymous 2011-04-10 5:42

>>25
Yes, even the template meta-programming mechanism is Turing complete.

http://matt.might.net/articles/c++-template-meta-programming-with-lambda-calculus/#sec3

Name: Anonymous 2011-04-10 5:59

>>26
Turing-complete sublanguages interpreted by a compiler at compile-time do not make a language Turing-complete.

If I preprocessed the ABC Programming Language with Perl, would it be Turing-complete?

Name: Anonymous 2011-04-10 8:18

Objective-C 2.0

Name: Anonymous 2013-09-01 10:51



               ,.-'"二フ
   ______         / //´
 く__ヽ、__`ヽ.      | | /
   `\ ヽ、!    ____,/ / !_
     `ヽ ヽ、'' ´   i。i./ `ヽ. ○
       ,`>!。/   `´      ヽ.
  O   /     i  、_ヽ. 、    ', ゜  
     ,'   /__,! ハ ハ,.ニ!、 iヽ!   ! 
     i  .i. ,!-!、. V ´ト ! }ハ !、  !
     イ i ハi ト_!.   'ー'゙。OVi  ',  o 
     レヘ 7,, _,,... -─ 、 ""i | i  ', 
   O 。 !人 |´     | 人/ ハ  ',
       / .ヘ`ヽ、_____,,..ノ//トー-'、!  ', 。
       レ´ i ヽ、 /i///_」::::::/:::ヽ. ! 
         ! .!/ヘ,.-'─、、;;;;____:::::::ヽ. |
        ./ /7:Y/ ,   l |:oo::::::`ヽ::i |
       //::::i:〈iゝi、_!__r//:::::::::::::::::ン ノ
      /::::::::/:::::Y:::::::::ゝ'─r--‐-i´イ

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