Re: Java, and so?...

On 2 Mar 1999 14:07:34 -0500, Denis Bredelet
<Denis.Bredelet@ensisun.imag.fr> wrote:
>I'm wondering why I don't have a choice when I need a
>Write Once-Run Anywhere, cross-platform, industry-elected
>(...) high-level language that doesn't make me amazed by its strangety.


What's wrong with perl? Java: write once, crash anywhere. Perl
actually works.


>Other question : what would you suggest to ease the linking and the
>modularity of a language? For now, I'm still thinking of C-like
>#include model...


Perl modules are amazing, and proven. C's model is a disaster,
because it allows arbitray source inclusion, not at a module level.
Consider, for example, a #include of a file in the middle of your
source file that has the single line "#define NULL 1" ... do you
really want to saddle your users with this?


>Another one : Do you know a powerful, simple and elegant way to manage
>strings? I'm looking at Perl, but I feel it isn't well-suited for
>generic languages.


If you don't like perl's strings, take a look a Limbo - it is simple
and elegant. (From lucent's website, for Inferno.) But what's not
to like about perl's strings? Once you look beyond the ugly syntax,
Perl is an amazing language, all the more amazing for being so fast
and so free and so well-supported.


>Last but not least, I'll have to think about graphics and
>presentation... Any references?


Perl is not so good here ... uses Tk. Have you looked at Python?
Much better in that area. But if you need speed, then ... Java
with Swing is pretty nice, isn't it?


Dwight

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.