On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 11:31:38PM +0200, Stéphane Aulery wrote: > As I mentioned in my first post, I will not want to write a piece of lower > level or intermediate software with a scripting language, but one can still > write a user software whose only dependency is the interpreter. The > principles can be transposed.
You still don't get it and ignored everything I wrote. But I'm going to give you some food: use of an "interpreted" language is ok for a user specific customisation of the behavior of a user level application, but with the following conditions: In no way a core functionality of the user level application should be implemented in the "interpreted" language; In no way the SDK of the user application must force the availability of the "interpreted" language to be compiled or run; the user application should have designed a strong interface that would allow many "interpreted" languages (or C or asm or whatever) to be used and not only one: usually a simple C API or a simple "network protocol". I would write C. For instance, awesome window manager was good and now it's really bad: - it's a bloat - core functionalities/SDK are lua only dependent. That's for open source software. > For Oberon I can not remember how I discovered it (maybe via Rob Pike's > Plan9 Acme inspiration). Niklaus Wirth literally spent his life simplifying > Algol to retrieve only the essential in Oberon, a language like C but with > less caltrop. Its aesthetic is not the same but the spirit is the same. It > was not for nothing that Uriel was pushing Go > (https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/11h7ab/9fans_uriel_has_passed_away/) > which has some relationship with it. You _really_ still don't get it. For your information, C syntax is already *WAY* too rich. Many of the linux kernel coding guidelines are actually a sort of an emphase of this point. The C types are "fixed" with the pre-processor: u8, u16, u32, s64, f32... and to be polite some things are "not recommended": no typedef, c99 declaration (better keep the c89 way namely at the top the function). I go a bit farther: no enum either and only one loop keyword, usually #define loop for(;;), no mandatory attributes like const. And for namespaces (very usefull for static libs), the cpp is far from enough. And with that, you write "low" to "high" level application/components, *ANYTHING*, even web interface (CGI/FastCGI/internal of the web server). ---- You really need to come down from your silver tower. I'm over with this. -- Sylvain
