Warp wrote:
> Another good example is Objective C, which has a rather small market
> (which is growing a bit due to the iPhone, though).

I thought all the NeXT and thus Mac OSX stuff was programmed in 
Objective-C? (Which was around even before the NeXT, also.)

-- 
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:

> Basically nobody knows what D is.

I recall seeing a language floating around (a *long* time ago!) called 
E, and another called F.

IIRC, the language before C was called B, so it's quite possible that 
more than one person has come up with a "better than C" language and 
called it "D" or "E" or whatever... ;-)

>   Not all attempts have failed though. Java and C# are examples of
> successful ones. (Although in their cases the changes from C/C++ have
> been a bit more radical.)

The conspicuous thing is that both of those languages are backed be huge 
well-known corporations...

Post a reply to this message

nemesis wrote:
> Languages like python and ruby abuse of their dynamic nature by going
> beyond just dynamic typing and allowing all kinds of funky and slow
> runtime
> metaprogramming.  A native compiler has no chance here.

But also, languages like python and ruby are often used where performance
doesn't really matter. Last I checked, the de-facto implementation (CPython
interpreter) doesn't even do constant folding.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> Warp wrote:
>> Another good example is Objective C, which has a rather small market
>> (which is growing a bit due to the iPhone, though).
> 
> I thought all the NeXT and thus Mac OSX stuff was programmed in
> Objective-C? (Which was around even before the NeXT, also.)

Yes. All apps on Mac are made in Objective-C. Non-GUI Objective-C code from
a Mac application can probably run unmodified on the iPhone. It's just the
GUI frameworks that changed completely.

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> IIRC, the language before C was called B, so it's quite possible that
> more than one person has come up with a "better than C" language and
> called it "D" or "E" or whatever... ;-)

Do you know why C# is called that way?

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez <nic### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> Invisible wrote:
> > IIRC, the language before C was called B, so it's quite possible that
> > more than one person has come up with a "better than C" language and
> > called it "D" or "E" or whatever... ;-)

> Do you know why C# is called that way?

  Well, when it was a pretty new thing, I heard that # in the name was
actually four + symbols, so it's C++++, ie. "C# is to C++ what C++ is
to C".

  I don't know if it was just a joke.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
>   Well, when it was a pretty new thing, I heard that # in the name was
> actually four + symbols, so it's C++++, ie. "C# is to C++ what C++ is
> to C".

Given that it's pronounced "C Sharp", I expect it's because it's half a 
note higher than C. Like, on a piano keyboard.

-- 
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> Warp wrote:
>>   Well, when it was a pretty new thing, I heard that # in the name was
>> actually four + symbols, so it's C++++, ie. "C# is to C++ what C++ is
>> to C".
> 
> Given that it's pronounced "C Sharp", I expect it's because it's half a
> note higher than C. Like, on a piano keyboard.

That's the one.

C++ is C postincremented by 1 in C syntax.
C# is C incremented by one semitone in musical syntax.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> >   Well, when it was a pretty new thing, I heard that # in the name was
> > actually four + symbols, so it's C++++, ie. "C# is to C++ what C++ is
> > to C".
>
> Given that it's pronounced "C Sharp", I expect it's because it's half a
> note higher than C. Like, on a piano keyboard.

Yes.  Java decided to diss C/C++ by dropping any mention to it in the name, but
Microsoft in their infinite marketing wisdom felt they should instead try to
get to the hearts of old C/C++ folks.  They also catered for buying managers by
substituting the irrelevant term "bytecode" for "managed code":  you know, if
it's managed, it knows its place. :)

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez <nic### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> But also, languages like python and ruby are often used where performance
> doesn't really matter.

The sad thing is that the places where performance shouldn't really matter is
the place where C/C++/Java/C# are firmly entrenched:  running custom apps in TI
sections of non-software developer firms.  It doesn't matter because such apps
are not usually infrastructure and if more performance is needed, it should
suffice to just throw more hardware.  OTOH, throwing more programmers at late
projects is a bad idea, according to Fred Brooks...

Post a reply to this message