5 ms·
Rebol and Red are both interesting to me for their given purposes. My desires for a language are somewhat self-contradicting. On one hand, I want a language as
by gavanwoolery 10y ago
Rebol and Red are both interesting to me for their given purposes. My desires for a language are somewhat self-contradicting.
On one hand, I want a language as simple as possible, with as few paradigms as possible, and as close to the metal as possible (or at least the ability to compile it down to something with C-equivalent performance). This would encompass the core of the language.
On the other hand, the language would have a wide variety of built-in libraries for UI, access to graphics hardware, networking, input, etc. The language's paradigms would also be easily extensible, perhaps as an added layer of compilation / meta programming.
- walterbell 10y agoTake a look at http://terralang.org http://terralang.org (low-level) and http://ebblang.org http://ebblang.org (DSL), both related to Lua, via meta-programming and LLVM.
- gavanwoolery 10y agoI've toyed with both languages, and they are only slightly off from something I have been looking for. One of my pet projects right now is a language that can be compiled to and/or simultaneously interpreted within C++, with minimal overhead or dependencies (just a small single header file). No need for LLVM, although I debated using it myself.