4 ms·
I've been tinkering with a language I call beep for a couple years now. It's sort of my programming equivalent of the old hot-rod sitting in the garage. I'll di
by danaliv 10y ago
I've been tinkering with a language I call beep for a couple years now. It's sort of my programming equivalent of the old hot-rod sitting in the garage. I'll disappear for a weekend while I work on it and then not even think about it for a month or two.
I made it/am making it mostly as an exercise. I like to know how things work, and there's no better way for me to learn than by doing. It's also just fun to make stuff. Last (and definitely least), it's an expression of a certain degree of frustration I have with the current offerings. My dream language—oh, maybe I should've named it "dream"—would feel like Ruby but have static types and no nil references. I wholeheartedly acknowledge the tension inherent in that statement; much of Ruby's power comes from its dynamism. But like I said, it's just an exercise. :)
Not sure if that qualifies as not-a-toy-language. Is a language's "toyness" based on its simplicity, or its intended use?
- chc4 10y agoHave you looked at Crystal before? It's a compiled statically typed variant of Ruby.
- danaliv 10y agoI haven't! I'll check that out.
- ufmace 10y agoSounds interesting. Have you ever tried Kotlin? I've mostly worked with Ruby and C#/.NET, and Kotlin, based on JVM, feels like an interesting fusion plus a few extra tricks. It's still mostly static, like Java, but adds a ton of stuff around blocks/lambdas and non-nullable reference types.
- danaliv 10y agoAh, funny, I was just reading about Kotlin yesterday. I haven't tried it but it looks interesting!