M Farkas-Dyck <strake...@gmail.com> writes: > Given the comments on alternatives to C lately on dev@ I thought this > a good time to introduce mine: http://k-lang.org/
The only implementation seems to be written in a pretty atrocious style: https://github.com/strake/pkc/blob/master/CodeGen/Common.hs Also - why care about whether or not the grammar is simple to parse if you're using something like Haskell to implement it, which can easily handle very context-dependent grammars? I'm curious about which flaws of C you are trying to fix. Sure, the syntax is simplified, and maybe the built-in numeric types are a little saner, but the benefit of such seems low compare to the cost of using such an obscure language. If you really want to substantially improve on C, I think adding a more elaborate type system, with which you can encode more invariants without run-time cost, is a more interesting approach, which can be seen in e.g. Rust. This will cost you greatly in increased implementation complexity, which I think is not to the taste of many on this list. Most of the complexity in a minimal C compiler will be in the parser, for example. -- \ Troels /\ Henriksen
