All programming languages are useless shit.

Hi, /prog/.

Recently I realized that all programming languages are useless shit.

I need just few things:
1. Closures, functions as first-class object and similar functional features
2. Strong typing, type inference, type parametrization (generics or similar), implicits/explicits
3. Metaprogramming features (like macros)
4. Cross-platform without any problems
5. Lightweight threads, coprogramms or (the best) erlang-style actors
6. Monad comprehensions

I tried:
1. Scala. All cool except no macros and it works on shitty Oracle thing called Java Virtual Machine (also it stack-based).
2. Haskell (Template Haskell). All cool except that I should tear up my ass in four parts to implement something that is not pure.
3. F#. Macros at runtime, also there are no actors and implicits, monad comprehensins is pathetically shitty.
4. OCaml. There is no operator overloading and typing is VERY STRONG + all problems of F# (except of macros), also AFAIK there is no concurrent GC for OCaml.
5. Common Lisp. All cool except no typing at all and no syntax at all, also parenthesis and infix notation make me puke blood.
6. Nemerle. The best language ever except there are one-and-a-half developers and it compiler crashes at every second line in my sources.

I had thoughts to develop my own language, but I am afraid that it repeats the Nemerle's fate.
Maybe I forgot something ?
Discuss.

inb4: C, C++, C#, Java, Delphi, PHP, Basic and similar imperative shit, I don't want to waste my time on it.

s/infix notation/prefix notation/
fast selffix

All programming languages are useless shit.
Maybe I forgot something ?
You don't know what you're talking about.

Do you jack off on languages or want to write something useful? If former write your own. If latter use this: http://www.random.org/dice/ The results would be nearly the same.

I'm talking about joy of programming. And there are no languages that brings me an orgasm like heroin do.

My own language will die before it becomes somewhat useful. Sad but true.

`C is an extension of ANSI C that provides the programmer with the ability to explicitly denote dynamic code generation (the creation of executable code at run time, while the application is running) at the level of C statements and expressions. `C provides primitives for dynamic code generation which are flexible, expressive, and machine-independent. The changes to ANSI C are small: `C preserves the spirit and "feel" of C, making it easy to learn and facilitating incremental modification of existing C code.
http://pdos.csail.mit.edu/tickc/

It doesn't seem to be what you're looking for but might interest people nonetheless.

Do you really care? Just write your own language so you have something sexy to jerk off on.

Or use an RNG to pick an existing language with more than three users if you really want to write something.

Okay. But I want to write something AND jerk off on language while I'm writing it. What should I do ?

s/infix notation/prefix notation/

You know you must really hate infix notation subconsciously. Do you want to talk about it?

I don't puke blood when I'm writing in infix. Is it a problem?

That's what you want to make yourself believe. But your fingers type "infix".

>>1
I'm glad you've seen the light. All programming languages are shit, because linguistics is the study of shit!

>>11
Yes, it is a sign of advanced ``faggotry''.
Contact your nearest Sussman and gargle concentrated SICP.

Common Lisp is strongly typed.

>not using Scheme to implement your own language
ISHYGDDT.scm

>>1

Well, let's see...
C++11 has the following:
 1. Closures, functions as first-class object and similar functional features
 2. Strong typing, type inference, type parametrization (generics or similar), implicits/explicits
 3. Metaprogramming features (like macros)
 4. Cross-platform without any problems
 5. Lightweight threads, coprogramms or (the best) erlang-style actors
 6. Monad comprehensions

And you wanted:
 1. Closures, functions as first-class object and similar functional features
 2. Strong typing, type inference, type parametrization (generics or similar), implicits/explicits
 3. Metaprogramming features (like macros)
 4. Cross-platform without any problems
 5. Lightweight threads, coprogramms or (the best) erlang-style actors
 6. Monad comprehensions


Maybe you should just stick with C++

>>1
You could always make your own.
I have no problem with infix, and tagged types (+some inference done on them), which is what CL actually has with some implementations (such as SBCL), but if nothing fits your requirements, why not write your own?

>>17
Well, it doesn't have monad comprehensions or any form of list comprehensions as language syntax, but it's not required. Various third-party parallelism libraries in C++ have Erlang style actors, light-weight tasks & futures/eventcounts, and numerous template functions and mechanisms for performing reductions on parallel data-structures.

Clojure has it all, except for strong typing obviously. But it's not for you if you can't handle the sharp beauty of S-expressions.

>>20
Except Clojure on the JVM is shit. The way you have to bundle the Clojure.jar with your application is pretty crappy, and fucking around with your CLASS_PATH or whatever the fuck. I had such hell trying to get it to work reliably on non-development machines.

Seriously, people need to stop targetting the JVM, the Java libraries are shit anyway. People should be focusing more on LLVM/HLVM.

comprehensions are shitty syntax extenstions for niggers that can't type out in full

>>1
2. Strong typing, type inference, type parametrization (generics or similar), implicits/explicits
Fuck you shit, faggot.

>>20
Clojure is broken.

>>21
Learn to lein uberjar. It will create a single .jar with all dependencies in it.

And "shit" libraries for everything are better than no libraries at all (and they are not so shitty anyway). I can assure you, Clojure would be nowhere today it wasn't based on JVM, despite all its nice concurrency features, collections and whatnot. Creating a comprehensive library infrastructure is a work for decade. Look at Ruby, with all the buzz it generated the libraries are still sparse even compared to Python. With the access to the Java libraries people can begin doing real programming in any domain straight away, it's the best argument to attract users. Clean, idiomatic libraries will start to appear later, when you gather a bigger community, and it's starting to happen with Clojure right now.

>>25
lein uberjar
Lain.

>>17
1. Closures
C++ closures are really limited in use and scope.
2. Strong typing, type inference, type parametrization (generics or similar), implicits/explicits
eh... not to the point OP wants.
3. Metaprogramming features (like macros)
shitty, over-complex, and ugly.
4. Cross-platform without any problems
unless you want to do something silly like make a dll or use an ffi.
5. Lightweight threads, coprogramms or (the best) erlang-style actors
where?
6. Monad comprehensions
where?

>>27
Thanks, Anon. OP.

>>17
Also where type inference, type parametrization and implicits?
Where AST for macros?

>>27
Please properly space and indent your posts, they are ugly and difficult to read at a glance.
I shudder to think what your code looks like.

Group quotes and answers to quotes together, do not group the answer of one quote with another quote, separate them with a newline.

Example:

> 1. Closures
  C++ closures are really limited in use and scope.


> 2. Strong typing, ...
  eh... not the point OP wants.

and so on.

>>29
I noticed as soon as I posted. I thought "oh that's lame. too bad there's no preview function. Wouldn't it be fucking insane if one of these autistic nutjobs made a comment on it?"

>>30
autistic nutjobs
U MENA ME?

You don't know how to use BBCode, faggot. I bet you couldn't multiquote your way out of a paper bag std::map std::multimap bag (actually I definitely want bags, having looked up the definition), so why don't you make like a tree and get out?

>>31
*runs away crying*
you can masturbate now.