.

There are no good C-like interpreted languages, /prog/. I plan to design a new language with the following features:

* C-like in syntax
* statically typed, not dynamically typed
* strongly typed, not weakly typed
* interpreted in the main implementation, but compilers are possible
* functions are first class objects
* classes, none of that duck typing shit
* basic data structures like vectors, lists, etc. are included, unlike in C
* templates for generic programming

>>31
No one mentioned Lisp. Plenty of languages have this effect, from Smalltalk to Haskell, which is why they are notable.

The reason why C is notable is because of it's no bullshit approach to memory handling; malloc and free (And their accompanying helper functions) do everything you need and fuck GC. You're taking C and making it high-level; will it still have the complete control? No, no matter how you handle variables, there will still be some functions and wrapper structures between the language and the machine, so the control, at least to the extent it was before, is gone. Taking the advantages of low level and leaving them out leaves only room for advantages of high level, which had better be worth it.