Help me find a better language than C++

[Krice]

I wanted to use C# for gui stuff mainly and I've never used Unity. I guess you could create a pseudo-UI just using plain images and stuff like that, but it would somehow feel weird. By the way, I tried XCode/Swift, but it has similar kind of "problem" with UI stuff, because you are working with default UI elements, but if there is something special you need then it's going to be harder to implement. Or maybe it's easy after all who knows, but it feels quite overwhelming.

I think it would be great to have something in between SDL2 and those complete UI systems like Windows forms or XCode. Other than crappy linux-based libraries like wxWidgets.

This turned again to UI problems, but they are one big problem in programming languages. I believe the actual success of a language depends on what kind of UI libraries you can use.

[Elronnd]

Try D (https://dlang.org/).  Among other things, it fixes a lot of the problems in c++.  Things that in c++ are cludges, feel native in D.  Also, it's the only language I know of that has a c++ FFI, meaning it can use (some) c++ libraries -- the FFI isn't perfect.  And like all languages, it has a (perfect) CFFI so you can trivially use any C library.

Someone else mentioned nim, that's a good language too.  I haven't found the fact that it compiles to c to be a problem, why would it?

[Krice]

it has a (perfect) CFFI so you can trivially use any C library.

Why would that be a good thing anyway? It's like saying the language sucks so much it needs C. Well, anyway, I have tried D. It's like C# but less modern and without Visual Studio's cool explanations for everything. D was an attempt to "fix" C++ but it doesn't really work that way. Java was also supposed to be that kind of language and it was a complete failure. Java's only legacy is that anything using Java is a huge security risk to your computer.

[mushroom patch]

I heard of a language being developed. It's called shtpst. The syntax is identical to forum posting, including emojis, image macros and so forth. It's a very advanced, next generation programming language. The team behind it is pretty eccentric. They post a lot on programming language forums about how other programming languages are bad or sometimes they're good in the same way that shtpst is planned to be (though not as good).

Of course, as a next generation programming language, you would expect a significant amount of time in development before a release. From what I understand, the developers expect a release in about a generation, roughly 20 years.

For the purposes of a programmer like Krice, someone looking to produce a next generation computer application, I think it will be worth the wait. It just makes sense for a next generation game to be written in a next generation programming language, even if it takes a generation.

[Krice]

It just makes sense for a next generation game to be written in a next generation programming language

It is kind of funny that we still have to use programming languages that were developed mainly in 1970's when for example graphical displays were quite rare and everything was text and command line based. As in linux development style today. I really think we need something better than anything we have today, with new kind of thinking that would remove all those tedious procedures we have in programming. Most of my problems in programming are technical problems that could have been solved by using more advanced built-in algorithms than what we have.

[Elronnd]

> "Compiling" to C sounds super safe, we all know C is such a great language in that.

And compiling DIRECTLY TO BINARY that runs STRAIGHT ON THE CPU is SAFER?

> It is kind of funny that we still have to use programming languages that were developed mainly in 1970's when for example graphical displays were quite rare and everything was text and command line based. As in linux development style today. I really think we need something better than anything we have today, with new kind of thinking that would remove all those tedious procedures we have in programming. Most of my problems in programming are technical problems that could have been solved by using more advanced built-in algorithms than what we have

If it ain't broke, don't fix it?  Can you give me something TANGIBLY wrong with all of programming, in general, today?  Anyway, it sounds like you're dismissing languages for no very good reason (nim compiles to c, it must be trash, I hate java like everyone else, d fails at fixing c++, I "have" to use c#).  Why don't you go and write your own programming language that completely fixes everything that's wrong with all these programming languages and is perfect and easy to work with and remakes all of modern programming first

Oh, also, take a look at lisp first.

[Krice]

Can you give me something TANGIBLY wrong with all of programming, in general, today?

Lots of problems there really. A big problem that has always been there is theory vs. practice, in both programming theory and performance. For example functional model is "good" only in some cases, but still some people take it as a religion. I think multi-paradigm languages are the best ones for generic programming. C# and some other languages like it tries to fix C++, but sadly C# is closely tied to .NET. I think we need a high level language (that compiles to machine code), but something more generic still. I hope that the dialog between computer hardware and language is simplified to more abstract level so that the language doesn't need to know specific features of the hardware. This could be done possibly even without external libraries, directly in the language.

[Lord_Mork]

Elronnd, you should use the quote button in the reply box or [q u o t e] [/q u o t e] (no spaces) for a more attractive quote. The angle bracket quote thing is difficult to read.

[Krice]

Just an update, I've gone so far as started to write imaginary code with my own language! No but it's kind of fun. This far I've managed to write code that doesn't have () or {} characters, I noticed you don't really need them and without them the source code is actually more readable.

[pat]

hi Krice, what's the ETA on Kaduria?