Why doesn't someone just take the best things from all languages and make the ultimate one?

Why doesn't someone just take the best things from all languages and make the ultimate one?

Other urls found in this thread:

pastebin.com/RGZepJNw
twitter.com/AnonBabble

C++ already exists.

That's how you end up with C++

fpbp + dubs

/thread

There are only two languages that should exist. A program should use Python for readability and also C for speed when it's important. Everything else including C++ is just a meme.

>having the worst of both worlds with a optimization-preventing layer between it

You are citing Cython as two languages

Can you connect English, German, Japanese and Russian that way?
The same goes to the programming languages

...

Hello.

All of those languages don't have logic, plus they are stupid, so need to mention them here

Fuck that shit

Isn't Cython a strict subset of Python that's compiled? That doesn't give you the flexibility of using both Python and C.

they did. it's called ADA

Because we don't understand functional programming to that extent yet.

This was tried once by IBM with their PL/I language.
Legend is they took half from Fortran and the other half from COBOL. The scientists coming from Fortran hated it because they saw COBOL in it, and the business programmers coming from COBOL hated it because it was too much like Fortran.

>designed for the US government
no thanks. I dont use botnets

Not completely, lets just say "speeds of c, simplicity of python"
Like a Fibonacci(70) prg in c compiles 126nsec per loop, python does it in 4.89usec, cython does it in 2.1usec.
Fibonacci(70) for range from (1,70) and usec is micro seconds and nsec is nano second

all i'm asking for is a high level language, with clean syntax, static typing and a good ecosystem. there is literally none.

the best you can have is using python/js with static type annotations and checkers, which is trash

>high level language, with clean syntax, static typing and a good ecosystem
Literally C++

What way does C# or Java not meet this?

Scala is pretty great. For a real language anyhow,

Your request still is a bit like:
> All I'm asking for is everything. Should be super easy to program, the syntax should make angels cry -including a perfect compiler that can handle it of course- and almost everything should be programmed already.
No language does that. We *don't* currently have perfect compilers for beautiful syntax.

Scala and Haskell and all other languages that have a nice syntax DO struggle with their compilers and standard library and so on, it's not that easy.

Guess I'll ask here, I know Java and Python, should I learn C++ or go through C first?
How often does one use C when knowing C++?

>java
>clean in any way

>Guess I'll ask here, I know Java and Python, should I learn C++ or go through C first?
What kind of a thing do you want to program?

'cause the areas in which they have strong frameworks are largely different. Most tasks are pretty firmly easier to do on C or C++, not a mix of both.

That's a funny way to spell holyc

> clean syntax
C++'s syntax is mostly resulting in fugly imperative spaghetti code that is both annoying to reuse by a coder and annoying to run in parallel by a machine.

It's not beautiful, it's just what you're familiar with.

===

both are way too verbose and the ecosystem isn't great, it's very enterprise-y

>C++ syntax is not clean
???

It's explicit, unambiguous and clear. I don't know how you can call it unclean.

>run in parallel by a machine
Uhm, you do know that C++ is usually compiled, right?

remember that xkcd cartoon about how we wind up with dozens of standards?

>no garbage collection is now considered "high level"
fuck right off

>both are way too verbose
What about based kotlin then?

> It's explicit, unambiguous and clear.
It's a language that creates virtually no safely reusable components.

You can even have runtime errors that weren't a result of unpredictable factors like IO or hardware failure, even for code that compiled. You were just doing something invalid, like running method m while field f was in a state that shouldn't have been valid. Validly compiled C++ code is still just a complete field of landmines. Not many fucks were given to reduce this to a minimum.

> Uhm, you do know that C++ is usually compiled, right?
And your point is? There is no compiler that can re-arrange your C++ as set of pure functions. It only works on the very most trivial parts, certain loops and such.

You have tons of shared memory that you can't realistically send everywhere where there a free core, and it's generally not even clear whether your machine can execute something in parallel unless a programmer explicitly prepared it to be so.

Meanwhile, other languages manage to make it clear which sections are sequential and which can be executed in parallel and what data they need. A scheduler of any kind throw these at all your cores at will, even in a network.

C is considered high level.

>You can even have runtime errors that weren't a result of unpredictable factors like IO or hardware failure
Undefined behaviour is not valid C++ code, so your argument is moot.

Who?

I can get thousands of runtime errors on code that compiles that AREN'T a result of hardware failure or IO, right?

They barely tried to limit these, but the state of affairs is just sad still.

>with a optimization-preventing layer between it
What optimization preventing layer? Python and C is like peanutbutter and jelly. Great by themselves and great together. There is nothing preventing anything between them, they work together like nothing else.

>I can get thousands of runtime errors on code that compiles that AREN'T a result of hardware failure or IO, right?
No, not unless you are writing invalid C++.

You can get segfaults pretty easily if you write shitty code

>shitty code
You mean invalid code.

Friendly reminder that undefined behaviour is not valid C++, and is therefore not an argument against C++.

Oh please.

Stupid shit is everywhere.The compiler doesn't always complain if you want to take or assign 10 elements from/to a sequence that isn't necessarily containing (space for) a multiple of ten elements, for example.

This is actually retarded, since you could have the compiler enforce that it's a multiple of ten, or enforce that the case where less than 10 elements can be taken from / put into that sequence is handled fully, too.

All sorts of things like that.

Found the retard.

>The compiler doesn't always complain if you want to take or assign 10 elements from/to a sequence that isn't necessarily containing (space for) a multiple of ten elements, for example.
How is this an argument? Imperfect compilers and interpreters are found everywhere.

>This is actually retarded, since you could have the compiler enforce that it's a multiple of ten, or enforce that the case where less than 10 elements can be taken from / put into that sequence is handled fully, too.
Use a better compiler then. It's not the language's fault that you're using a stupid compiler.

haskell tbqh

Historical reasons

>>>reddit

This.

Why doesn't everyone take all the best things from all car brands and make the ultimate one?

The 16-cylinder engine will fail to provide its benefits in the face of the combined weight of the giant frame, 16 seats, tank tracks, cup holders, and bulletproof windshield.
The fancy door mechanism will be obstructed by the ski and surfboard mounts on the roof of the car, which in turn cover the sunroof, removing all its benefits.

What we truly need
ist strong AI interpreting natural lang commands into a framework that makes Python seem like assembly.
A 5GL.

Fickt euch ihr bayerischen Inzestopfer, wird Zeit dass euch der nächste Kugeln in die Rübe jagt ihr hässlichen Asseln da unten. Missgeburten von der Uni wie euch wünsch ihr nichts weiter als den Terror. Erstickt an eurer eigenen verkoksten Nase ihr Ratten.

>Why doesn't someone just take the best things from all languages and make the ultimate one?
Fortran

The oldest, the best

Its called common lisp

I think you might want to follow him back. You clearly haven't been here long.

natural language is naturally vague. If you're lucky the AI will encounter a logical flaw during compile time and fail to build, if you're not lucky you will have virtually endless unexpected behavior.

Kotlin.

That is why I said a framework is necessary. Natural language is bad, I tell you.
Harry is a dog.
Dogs love bloody bones.
Harry will love this bloody bone.
This can be an argument via modus ponens as easily as a hypothetical syllogism. Either interpretation ist valid, yet, logically, these two inferences are distinct.
I'm with you.

but you can

English has a bunch of German in it.
In fact, it even has some Japanese in it now.
English is also the worst example since it has eaten languages like it is going out of fashion.

There is nothing stopping you from combining languages, even with the weird rules between them being inconsistent.
You can MAKE them consistent. You are making a new language after all.

All natural languages follow very specific rules, syntax and such.
This being proper spoken language. Broken [language] could potentially cause errors if left to interpretation.
Experience with broken [language] would then be required and you get the Language Translation problem: speakers aren't fully literate even in their own language. There is no such thing as Pure [language] since it is always changing and being bastardized by the illiterate.
That causes huge issues.
But that's a problem of many languages that can be solved by making a very rigid and unchanging language from scratch that is easily extendible.

Constructed Languages that try to do this sort of stuff have some good ideas.
But some of them are so fucking dumb and the creators have no experience with language outside a few common ones most times. So you end up getting awful Conlangs out there.
They are so bad that even Kekkish makes more sense than some. And it's a literal meme language.
pastebin.com/RGZepJNw

The only problem with building a logical framework around natural language is that one must find a way to describe natural language and ideas to a computer. If it is not in the form of low-level machine-readable data, then it is in the form of natural language, which results in the limit being what kinds of natural language the machine is taught to understand in low-level instructions.

We'll just give it a million instruction set, it's fiiiine

It's called JavaScript, retard

They already did that.
It's called D.

What's the point of having an extremely heavily microcoded CISC architecture if none of the instructions have any significance?

Today's computer architectures are designed for arithmetic and logical manipulation of bits. Having a million diverse instructions wouldn't change the fact that the task is to describe innately human ideas logically and arithmetically.

Therefore we must develop an instruction set and corresponding microarchitecture designed to concretely model the human mind's functions, which obviously requires us to fully understand the human mind to the point of being able to concretely model it using a computer.

Alternatively, we can take a shortcut using artificially grown brains or wetware computers that can eventually become sentient without us doing the work lol

Soon, you'll just tell an AI what do you want of a program and the AI will code and compile it in 0.5 secs.