|Atomicity block firstname.lastname@example.org (2004-02-01)|
|Re: Atomicity block email@example.com (Les Cargill) (2004-02-04)|
|Re: Atomicity block firstname.lastname@example.org (Thad Smith) (2004-02-04)|
|Re: Atomicity block email@example.com (2004-02-04)|
|Re: Atomicity block firstname.lastname@example.org (2004-02-04)|
|Re: Atomicity block email@example.com (2004-02-08)|
|Re: Atomicity block K.Hagan@thermoteknix.co.uk (Ken Hagan) (2004-02-12)|
|Re: Atomicity block firstname.lastname@example.org (Les Cargill) (2004-02-13)|
|Language design, was Re: Atomicity block email@example.com (Joachim Durchholz) (2004-02-26)|
|From:||Les Cargill <firstname.lastname@example.org>|
|Date:||13 Feb 2004 23:52:49 -0500|
|References:||04-02-022 04-02-047 04-02-100|
|Posted-Date:||13 Feb 2004 23:52:49 EST|
Ken Hagan wrote:
> Les Cargill wrote:
> > Ada has keywords for atomicity, but Ada didn't do very well in the
> > marketplace. Shame, it's a nice system.
> Perhaps someone should make Ada look like C. It can't be that
> hard, since it is only syntax. (I'm thinking of a full compiler
> like Cfront, though a pre-processor might be sufficient to get
> people interested.)
> (You know the sort of thing: curly braces, up-its-own-backside
> declaration syntax, overload the angle brackets for generics.)
> A "C-like syntax" certainly worked for Java (and C++ before it).
In the sense that a bowl haricut worked for the Rolling Stones...
> Of course, you'd have to give it a new name, such as Ada++, or
> else you'd never be able to market it to the great unwashed.
> (No smiley. It was borderline, but on balance I think this is a
> serious suggestion.)
I thnk there really ought to be a moratorium* on languages. I know,
horrors! but it's the Tower of Babel out there as it is...
*Nothing harsh, just a suggestion for the language breeders to
consider the birth control patch...
[It's about 35 years too late. The last interestingly innovative
language was Simula in 1967, but that hasn't kept people from
inventing new ones. -John]
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.