5 ms·

I wonder what other wonderful languages I've never heard of. Really, please share!

iso-8859-1 13y ago
MetaML, a language with as many levels of macros as you'd like: http://www.cs.rice.edu/~taha/publications/journal/tcs00.pdf http://www.cs.rice.edu/~taha/publications/journal/tcs00.pdf (implementation as MetaOcaml)
zem 13y ago
if you're looking for interesting systems languages, clay looks good too: http://claylabs.com/clay/ http://claylabs.com/clay/
evincarofautumn 13y ago
Kitten, a statically typed, globally type-inferred, GC-less functional stack language, with opt-in layout-based syntax and an effect system to separate pure and impure operations. Disclaimer: I wrote this; it’s nowhere near complete, but not bad to play around with. We’re working toward a release in a few weeks, to include some missing language features and a new x86_64 runtime. https://github.com/evincarofautumn/kitten https://github.com/evincarofautumn/kitten http://kittenlang.org/ http://kittenlang.org/
- tomp 13y ago
  Can I ask you one thing: why did you decide to write a stack-based programming language? I'm really curious, as I personally see nothing good with them. The same kind of non-mathematical syntax as LISP (`1 2 +` as opposed to `+ 1 2`), without any of the goodness (code is data).
  - coldtea 13y ago
    Seriously? Ever heard about this Forth thing?
  - evincarofautumn 13y ago
    In Factor, code is data. Remember, though, that there are many sources of goodness in a language. As for your actual question, I decided to write a stack-based language because: • They can be implemented very efficiently on real hardware. The stack-based VM is well established as an implementation technique for non–stack-based languages. • Like in Lisp, the simple structure makes them suitable for useful visualisations beyond the program text. Static typing creates even more cool possibilities for such analysis. • There is fertile ground for new research, and applying existing theory to these languages for the first time—particularly type and effect systems. • It’s just a lot of fun. :)
    - tomp 13y ago
      I agree with all of those, to me is just seems like transformation into stack-based language should be made as part of the compilation process, not written down by the programmer. Maybe it's just me, I totally admit that I'm not used to thinking in concatenative languages as I've never used one, but mathematics, with named variables and control- and data-flow denoted by functions or sequential lines of operations, seems the most natural notation to read, write and think in.
      - evincarofautumn 13y ago
        I totally understand. In fact, Kitten has named variables for that reason. You can write code that looks imperative, expressiony, or dataflowy, according to taste. Here’s a silly example: // Implicitly thread state between functions. def promptInt: ": " cat prompt readInt fromSome // Write stacky code if you want. def squareDiff: - dup * // Use locals as much as you need to. "x0" promptInt ->x0 "y0" promptInt ->y0 "x" promptInt ->x "y" promptInt ->y x0 x squareDiff ->a y0 y squareDiff ->b a b + sayInt
InAnEmergency 13y ago
You may be interested in the Fledgling Languages List: http://fll.presidentbeef.com/ http://fll.presidentbeef.com/
copx 13y ago
Some of my relatively obscure favorites: Io: http://iolanguage.org/ http://iolanguage.org/ Dylan: http://opendylan.org/ http://opendylan.org/ Euphoria: http://www.rapideuphoria.com/ http://www.rapideuphoria.com/
- zem 13y ago
  i've always felt that had i discovered euphoria earlier in my programming life, i would have really liked it. these days i'd miss all the features more recent languages have borrowed from lisp and/or ml, but it would have been an awesome second or third language (after basic and c).
  - copx 13y ago
    I discovered Euphoria back in the DOS days when it was still commercial. I agree that it seems a little dated these days but I still fondly remember it. Also it is still a great language for non-professional programmers and still has an active community there. Note the recently updated SDL2, SFML2, and Allegro bindings for example.
doublec 13y ago
For an interesting systems programming language try ATS [1]. It's an ML style functional programming language with dependent types, linear types, macros, generics and compiles to C giving reasonable portability. [1] http://www.ats-lang.org/ http://www.ats-lang.org/
epsylon 13y ago
Check out fogus' lists of "Perlis languages": http://blog.fogus.me/2011/08/14/perlis-languages/ http://blog.fogus.me/2011/08/14/perlis-languages/ http://blog.fogus.me/2011/10/18/programming-language-development-the-past-5-years/ http://blog.fogus.me/2011/10/18/programming-language-develop...

MetaML, a language with as many levels of macros as you'd like: http://www.cs.rice.edu/~taha/publications/journal/tcs00.pdf http://www.cs.rice.edu/~taha/publications/journal/tcs00.pdf (implementation as MetaOcaml)

zem 13y ago

if you're looking for interesting systems languages, clay looks good too: http://claylabs.com/clay/ http://claylabs.com/clay/

evincarofautumn 13y ago

Kitten, a statically typed, globally type-inferred, GC-less functional stack language, with opt-in layout-based syntax and an effect system to separate pure and impure operations. Disclaimer: I wrote this; it’s nowhere near complete, but not bad to play around with. We’re working toward a release in a few weeks, to include some missing language features and a new x86_64 runtime. https://github.com/evincarofautumn/kitten https://github.com/evincarofautumn/kitten http://kittenlang.org/ http://kittenlang.org/

tomp 13y ago
Can I ask you one thing: why did you decide to write a stack-based programming language? I'm really curious, as I personally see nothing good with them. The same kind of non-mathematical syntax as LISP (`1 2 +` as opposed to `+ 1 2`), without any of the goodness (code is data).
- coldtea 13y ago
  Seriously? Ever heard about this Forth thing?
- evincarofautumn 13y ago
  In Factor, code is data. Remember, though, that there are many sources of goodness in a language. As for your actual question, I decided to write a stack-based language because: • They can be implemented very efficiently on real hardware. The stack-based VM is well established as an implementation technique for non–stack-based languages. • Like in Lisp, the simple structure makes them suitable for useful visualisations beyond the program text. Static typing creates even more cool possibilities for such analysis. • There is fertile ground for new research, and applying existing theory to these languages for the first time—particularly type and effect systems. • It’s just a lot of fun. :)
  - tomp 13y ago
    I agree with all of those, to me is just seems like transformation into stack-based language should be made as part of the compilation process, not written down by the programmer. Maybe it's just me, I totally admit that I'm not used to thinking in concatenative languages as I've never used one, but mathematics, with named variables and control- and data-flow denoted by functions or sequential lines of operations, seems the most natural notation to read, write and think in.
    - evincarofautumn 13y ago
      I totally understand. In fact, Kitten has named variables for that reason. You can write code that looks imperative, expressiony, or dataflowy, according to taste. Here’s a silly example: // Implicitly thread state between functions. def promptInt: ": " cat prompt readInt fromSome // Write stacky code if you want. def squareDiff: - dup * // Use locals as much as you need to. "x0" promptInt ->x0 "y0" promptInt ->y0 "x" promptInt ->x "y" promptInt ->y x0 x squareDiff ->a y0 y squareDiff ->b a b + sayInt

InAnEmergency 13y ago

You may be interested in the Fledgling Languages List: http://fll.presidentbeef.com/ http://fll.presidentbeef.com/

copx 13y ago

Some of my relatively obscure favorites: Io: http://iolanguage.org/ http://iolanguage.org/ Dylan: http://opendylan.org/ http://opendylan.org/ Euphoria: http://www.rapideuphoria.com/ http://www.rapideuphoria.com/

zem 13y ago
i've always felt that had i discovered euphoria earlier in my programming life, i would have really liked it. these days i'd miss all the features more recent languages have borrowed from lisp and/or ml, but it would have been an awesome second or third language (after basic and c).
- copx 13y ago
  I discovered Euphoria back in the DOS days when it was still commercial. I agree that it seems a little dated these days but I still fondly remember it. Also it is still a great language for non-professional programmers and still has an active community there. Note the recently updated SDL2, SFML2, and Allegro bindings for example.

doublec 13y ago

For an interesting systems programming language try ATS [1]. It's an ML style functional programming language with dependent types, linear types, macros, generics and compiles to C giving reasonable portability. [1] http://www.ats-lang.org/ http://www.ats-lang.org/

epsylon 13y ago

Check out fogus' lists of "Perlis languages": http://blog.fogus.me/2011/08/14/perlis-languages/ http://blog.fogus.me/2011/08/14/perlis-languages/ http://blog.fogus.me/2011/10/18/programming-language-development-the-past-5-years/ http://blog.fogus.me/2011/10/18/programming-language-develop...