Do any exist? I've been looking for something like a high level C. The closest thing is probably Lua, but that's obviously unacceptable. Plus Lua is more C++ and less C. I liked Perl, but Perl 6 is not so good and has left a bad taste in my mouth.
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-03 3:51
If it ain't Lisp, it's crap.
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-03 3:54
>>2
I'm looking for something more like a high level C, not a Lisp language.
>>7
retard,
yes it is,you can use natural words and most of the time you don't deal with registers an shit
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-03 5:25
>The closest thing is probably Lua
Lua is nothing like C, functions are first-class, dynamic typing, etc; but perhaps you are saying this because it is embedded in C?
>Plus Lua is more C++ and less C
full retard
>I liked Perl, but Perl 6 is not so good and has left a bad taste what is wrong with you.
IHBT
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-03 5:42
>>8
oh you fucking retard now you just done it. high level is relative you jew
What the fuck is this bullshit? Who would deny that Lua is closer to C++ than C?
Fuck off now. Perl 6 is worse than it was.
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-03 5:48
>>11
Common Lisp's syntax is retarded and it isn't powerful enough to justify it.
Name:
F r o z e n V o i d !!mJCwdV5J0Xy2A212011-12-03 5:52
>>1
You want something like D2.05x(Digital Mars D) with garbage collector turned off and using C libraries.
It won't be as fast as Real C in some cases, but you can work around that.
>>1
Don't sound so hopeless! It's true you'll never meet a good high-level language in person, but there are plenty of ways to be close to her without ever needing to meet her - you can play against (or as) her in the Touhou games themselves, or collect images of her from the 'boorus, or read doujin involving her, or even get a dakimakura.
Or you could kidnap a young Japanese girl, dye her hair grey, dress her as a good high-level language, and keep her locked up in your house. The choice is yours.
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-03 7:12
>>15
You're a fucking retard kill yourself. C++ influenced Lua the most.
>>1 The closest thing is probably Lua, but that's obviously unacceptable.
why?
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-04 2:58
I liked Perl, but Perl 6 is not so good and has left a bad taste in my mouth.
So continue using Perl 5. It's not going anywhere.
Also, what don't you like about Perl 6? It is hard to find people who aren't already die-hard Perl 5 guys who don't find Perl 6 way better. (Albeit slower. Dammit.)
>>28
Well it's less Haskell-y. There are mutable things.
Haskell is not like C++. (And ML is not like C.)
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-04 4:03
>but Perl 6 is not so good and has left a bad taste in my mouth.
Have you installed pineapple module from CPAN? It improves the taste.
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-04 4:07
>>25
I agree "like C" is too vague. I'm not an experienced programmer and I'm really picky about what language I program in for some reason. I start "real programming" with C and I just really liked it for various reasons. I felt like it taught me actual programming.
Anyway, after a while I would try new languages and be put off by what I thought were annoying syntax decisions or whatever. It's really stupid of me to do it, but I'm at a point in my life where I can't enjoy anything, and I'd like to be able to hold on to this.
I'm just looking for a non-OO higher level language that has syntax similar to C's. Is that still too vague? I think Perl is a decent example, and I might end up sticking with it. But if you can think of a better example, let me know.
I agree "like C" is too vague. I'm not an experienced programmer and I'm really picky about what language I program in for some reason.
Just learn a whole bunch of languages. After you have seen enough of them, you'll have more perspective on them, and what each one can be better suited for different situations. You are probably just experiencing a defensive reaction to the difficulty of learning a new language. This is very likely to occur if you are proficient in one specific paradigm and you are trying to learn a new, very different one. You suddenly feel incapable of doing simple things like reading input and and it is very tempting to take the easy route and stay with only what you are already familiar with.
Anyway, after a while I would try new languages and be put off by what I thought were annoying syntax decisions or whatever. It's really stupid of me to do it, but I'm at a point in my life where I can't enjoy anything, and I'd like to be able to hold on to this.
That's too bad. Maybe there are other things to experience? There's more to life than programming. It is fun, but I don't think I would program if I had a week left to live. I'd probably walk around, and climb stuff or something.
I'm just looking for a non-OO higher level language that has syntax similar to C's. Is that still too vague? I think Perl is a decent example, and I might end up sticking with it. But if you can think of a better example, let me know.
Perl is well suited for certain applications, like automated sys admining and parsing text. If you have a certain task in mind, then you should look check out what your needs will be. How fast does it need to be? What are the memory constraints? What other sorts of things will it have to interface with? What will it run on? A phone? An internet browser? A super computer? A distributed network? A TI 83? And then there is the question, what languages do other people that might work on this know, and this seems to take precedence over all other questions.
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-04 4:46
>>34 Just learn a whole bunch of languages
Isn't it way better to get good at a few languages rather than learning dozens I don't really know well at all.
Maybe there are other things to experience?
Nope. And if there are, I can't do them.
If you have a certain task in mind, then you should look check out what your needs will be.
Just something I can enjoy. Although I would like something with a nice plotting library if possible.
>>32 I'm just looking for a non-OO higher level language that has syntax similar to C's. Is that still too vague
This C syntax requirement will limit you a lot... The classic high level languages that expands the mind in meaningful ways all have distinct syntax.
once you know a few, it becomes very easy to learn new ones. I suppose it could be better to just focus getting a solid understanding of a few at first though, and then move on to others.
Sorry. I'm used to seeing people looking for pity on the internet, and I clumped you into that group after reading your response, but seeing how I prompted you for the response, you where not looking for pity when starting the thread.
paraview is fun. The way I've used it in the past is by writing programs that calculate data and generate text files that contain data points, and then loading the text file from paraview.
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-04 6:03
IronPython maybe?
Just becouse python has OOP capabilities you don't need to use it.
With the module system you can use it as an excellent procedural language. And python is the language that hates modern syntax the most so it will probably fit you.
>>34 There's more to life than programming. It is fun, but I don't think I would program if I had a week left to live. I'd probably walk around, and climb stuff or something.
You must be joking friend.
>>43
Haskell, OCaml and their ilk are part of a 45-year-old static-typing movement within academia to try to force people to model everything. Programmers hate that. These languages will never, ever enjoy any substantial commercial success, for the exact same reason the Semantic Web is a failure. You can't force people to provide metadata for everything they do. They'll hate you.
An important theoretical idea behind type systems is "soundness". Researchers love to go on about whether a type system is "sound" or not, and "unsound" type systems are considered bad. C++ and Java have "unsound" type systems. To date, the more "sound" a type system is, the more often it's wrong when you try to use it. This is half the reason that C++ and Java are so successful: they let you stop using the type system whenever it gets in your way. The other half of their success stems from the ability to create user-defined static types. The reason C++ and Java (particularly Java) have been so successful is that their type systems form a "let's not get any work done" playground for n00bs to spend time modeling things and telling themselves stories. You can't actually model everything; it's formally impossible and pragmatically a dead-end. But they try. And they tell their peers that you have to model everything or you're a Bad Citizen.
One very real technical problem with the forced-modeling approaches that static type systems are often "wrong". It may be hard to imagine, because by a certain definition they can't be "wrong": the code (or data) is programmatically checked to conform to whatever constraints are imposed by the type system. So the code or data always matches the type model. But the type system is "wrong" whenever it cannot match the intended computational model. Every time want to use multiple inheritance or mixins in Java's type system, Java is "wrong", because it can't do what you want. You have to take the most natural design and corrupt it to fit Java's view of the world.
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-04 6:49
Have you considered Pike?
It's basically just C with garbage collection, anonymous functions, and classes.
>>46
Sounds like a load of bull, not sure if troll. I haven't met a type system I couldn't subvert, and I only rarely provide type information to the MLs. I don't feel compelled or obligated to "model everything" either.
Personally I benefit from static typing. I don't demand soundness but I'm not a pussy about it either. I certainly don't cry about it when the compiler tells me my program is incorrect.
Fucking assembly better then c++, atleast no fucking types or nullpointer exception from hell, and no fucking inhertiance full retard chains.
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-04 11:00
>>35 Although I would like something with a nice plotting library if possible.
Python has a nice plotting library. But if you're all about the plotting and the matrices, try R or Matlab (/Octave).
Also, Isn't it way better to get good at a few languages rather than learning dozens I don't really know well at all.
It's stupid to choose to specialize in a specific area before you even have an overview of the field. Having even very brief experience with different language designs should help you in your day-to-day programming in whatever language you choose. It also prevents some common types of tunnel vision.
>>64
To be fair wikipedia is talking about taking the machine details away while there are low-level languages that will give you powerful abstraction features. I have no idea which >>63 meant though.
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-04 19:19
check my high level dubs
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-04 20:27
>>56
Yeah, I'm already pretty good with MATLAB/Octave. Used it in college a lot. I worked with R a little bit, but again I was put off by some of the odd syntax.
I'll try out the suggestions in this thread (other than Python, I already tried it out). Also, why do you guys recommend Common Lisp? I was going to use Scheme so I could learn it with SICP.
>>69
Wasn't my choice, we used MATLAB in my college. Truth be told it's innate matrix math ability made a lot of our simulations really easy. That plus it had a lot of good visualization tools.
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-05 1:48
Bash (71 chars):
for f in *.png; do convert "$f" $(echo "$f" | sed 's/png$/jpg/'); done
Symta (53 chars):
fe (F:[@P [N {png}]] -> convert F [@P [N {jpg}]]) ls
He probably means, use classes, use one consistent version of inheritance, don't overdo it with multiple inheritance, and don't make template <template> <template friend> Functor++ &*friend >>>>>>template< > << friends*&.
Let's see, for non-ASM/C/C++ non-GC languages, we have:
pre-Algol-68 (no heap)
BASICs when ignoring the string table, Integer and embedded system BASICs
COBOL (ALLOCATE / FREE)
Forth (ALLOCATE / FREE)
Fortran (ALLOCATE / DEALLOCATE),
Modula-2 (NEW / DISPOSE) but not Modula-2+, Modula-3, Oberon
Objective-C with GC disabled (alloc / new / copy / release)
PL/I (ALLOC / FREE)
Pascal (NEW / DISPOSE / setLength / .create / .destroy)
PostScript Level 1 (no heap?) but not Level 2
RPG (ALLOC / %ALLOC / DEALLOC)
GC but some optional manual memory management?
AutoHotkey (VarSetCapacity)
D had delete but deprecated
Factor ((malloc) / (free), previously malloc)
Object REXX only (RexxAllocateMemory / RexxFreeMemory)
PureBasic (AllocateMemory / FreeMemory)
R (rm)
Retro (allot)
ZX Spectrum BASIC (CLEAR)
>>21 which could be accomplished easily with a script that compiles c with namespaces to c with name mangling.
Name mangling is utter bullshit for anything meant to be interfaced with.
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-06 15:27
dead? U -> U,n? || (and U.Mask TileMasks.Dead)!=0
targetable? U -> U && U.Parent,n?
selectable? U -> U,dead?,n? && U,targetable? && U.HP,pos?
center U -> U.Tile + U.Size%%2
centerDisp U -> U.Disp +16U.Size-[16 16]
distanceToPlayer XY -> abs XY - Units,ThisPlayer,center
prettyName U -> U.UIName || sym (subst "_" " " U.Type,str)
unitUiColor U -> U.Owner==ThisPlayer |> #00FF00 :: Tints.(U.Color)
hp100 U -> H:U.HP (H-U.Hits)*100%%H
actGT N O -> NP:N.Prio OP:O.Prio -> OP<NP || OP==NP && O.Forced,n?
order O U -> O,sym? |> O=:UTs.'O -> Id:(U,xs? |> U.Id :: U)
-> actGT O Orders.'Id |> Orders.'Id=:O -> U
unitSay S U -> U,int? |> U=:Units,U -> D:n
-> S:U.Sounds.(S,([N I] -> D=:I -> N; S->S))
-> snd\play (D|>S,D::S,pick) Volume=1.0-U.Tile,distanceToPlayer/24
act O U -> O,sym? |> O=:UTs.'O -> !O.Dst || U.Id -> !O.Range || U.Range || 1
-> U.Path |> U.Path=:n -> U.Act=:O
units Is -> map ?,(I:int?->Units,I; U->U) Is
anim A U -> U.Anim =: (U.Anims.'A||U.Anims.Still)
swapAnim D S U -> UTs.(U.Type).Anims.'S |> U.Anims.'D=:It :: U
ruleMove U A T -> canMoveTo T.Tile U
ruleBoard U A T -> T.Transport && T.Owner==U.Owner
doBoard U => @!Trans 'hide [U.Act.Dst U.Id] -> U.Act=:n
doUnloadSelf U => @!Trans 'show U.Id -> U.Act=:n
produce C U HP=n
-> O:[@UTs.Producing O=Cycle T=(max 1 24C.Time%%32) Last=Cycle Cost=C]
-> HP |> (-> U.Hits=:U.HP-1 -> O.AddHP=:U.HP/O.T) -> U.Incomplete=:y -> act O U
ruleBuild U A T -> buildRect T.Tile U UTs.(A.What) | all 'y?
>>90 Not if mangling is sane.
Just put Average_insertValue instead of insertValue__7AverageFv and I won't care about. Don't people write glRotatef instead of gl::rotate(float) anyways?
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-06 17:30
GC is great, Lisp/C++ is for faggots.
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-06 18:37
>>83
You call all those languages shit, then have the gal to tell the OP to use C++?
>>108
The first thing I coded was a silly chess game inside a Word 97 document with VBA macros and forms. It's sad that I needed to read books to learn C and C++ though.
Name:
Anonymous2011-12-07 23:07
wanting to use /g/ speak on /prog/
not going back to /g/
What is this board? L33t kids who accidentally clicked a link to /prog/ someone posted on /g/ in school and think of themselves as cool programmers?