When it comes to programming languages, the C/C++ audience isn't the
sharpest knife in the drawer. In fact they most likely reject any other
language if the syntax and semantics aren't 95% the same.
I don't give a damn about syntax being C like or not, if it is good at
expressing things, that is enough for me. None of my posts here state
otherwise.
What's your definition of a "system language"? Being able to write
operating systems, OS drivers, kernel mode applications, embedded small
footprint applications, server applications, games, simulations, HPC? If
you only need one of these domains in your project, why should you care
about the rest - the right tool for the job, right?
It is right, right (and only) tool in those domains, and as you can see it
is kind of a large area.
None of those languages are the right tool in those areas, are they?
I'm guessing your definition is the one that makes functional languages
or imperative languages with different syntax from C/C+++ look bad and
C/C
++ shine. Your agenda is to crush all competition because the retarded
competitors think *differently* and that's dangerous!
I said i like Haskell, also python... i am not an OOP fan. I don't have an
agenda to crash any competition. How did you get here beyond me...
Look, i said things like "OS" "C audience", "high performance", "system
language". Is that really hard to get?
--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
