Hi Matt, > Good syntax, readability, learning curve are all great features of JAL > compared to other languages (mainly C), and are quite important. As > for other features, JAL may have them some day.
What of the JAL syntax is better than C and why? What's the difference in learning curce, e.g. related to Arduino? And what are those great features (except longer vars, of course) that are unique for JAL? I am not saying I disagree, I just want to understand what you think is the added value of JAL over, say Arduino / C. So please be specific. > Why can't C backend use C libraries? I thought the output would be a C > file to be later compiled by a C compiler. Procedures written in C > could be easily added to the output, or even to the JAL code if kyle > adds support. Adding functions and varialbes C-compile-time is easy, but you can't use them in your JAL program when they are not defined in JAL. (actually, you currently can use functions by using prototypes due to a compiler bug. But that will be changed and there is no similar way to specify variables). And of course it's all software, so almost everything can be made possible if you have unlimited resources. But if the list of required changes keeps growing, it becomes less likely that it will be actually implemented. Joep -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jallib" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jallib?hl=en.
