C syntax and other script languages

Discussion in 'C Programming' started by lovecreatesbeauty, Nov 11, 2010.

  1. Is it possible for so many other scripts like sh, awk, php, perl and
    javascript:) to keep a smallest set of their basic syntax, built-in
    types, built-in operators, control structures as same as C languages's
    as possible?

    Thank you for your time
     
    lovecreatesbeauty, Nov 11, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. lovecreatesbeauty

    Eric Sosman Guest

    On 11/10/2010 11:06 PM, lovecreatesbeauty wrote:
    > Is it possible for so many other scripts like sh, awk, php, perl and
    > javascript:) to keep a smallest set of their basic syntax, built-in
    > types, built-in operators, control structures as same as C languages's
    > as possible?


    1) Yes, obviously. All the languages you mention are written as
    linear sequences of coded characters, and thus share the exact same
    "smallest set of their basic syntax."

    2) No, of course not. Everyone who invents a new language wants
    his language to be better than existing languages. By claiming that
    existing languages are "bad," he makes his goal of being "better" that
    much easier. Since he doesn't want existing bad languages to infect
    his glorious new language, he scraps or twists or perverts as many
    features of existing languages as he can get away with, and calls the
    resulting incompatibilities a mark of his language's superiority.

    3) What on Earth are you talking about?

    --
    Eric Sosman
    lid
     
    Eric Sosman, Nov 11, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. lovecreatesbeauty

    tm Guest

    On 11 Nov., 05:27, Eric Sosman <> wrote:
    > On 11/10/2010 11:06 PM, lovecreatesbeauty wrote:
    >
    > > Is it possible for so many other scripts like sh, awk, php, perl and
    > > javascript:) to keep a smallest set of their basic syntax, built-in
    > > types, built-in operators, control structures as same as C languages's
    > > as possible?

    >
    > 1) Yes, obviously. All the languages you mention are written as
    > linear sequences of coded characters, and thus share the exact same
    > "smallest set of their basic syntax."
    >
    > 2) No, of course not. Everyone who invents a new language wants
    > his language to be better than existing languages. By claiming that
    > existing languages are "bad," he makes his goal of being "better" that
    > much easier. Since he doesn't want existing bad languages to infect
    > his glorious new language, he scraps or twists or perverts as many
    > features of existing languages as he can get away with, and calls the
    > resulting incompatibilities a mark of his language's superiority.


    Yes, you really hit the spot.

    And when the new language is implemented most people react by
    complaining about the differences to C ... :)


    Greetings Thomas Mertes

    --
    Seed7 Homepage: http://seed7.sourceforge.net
    Seed7 - The extensible programming language: User defined statements
    and operators, abstract data types, templates without special
    syntax, OO with interfaces and multiple dispatch, statically typed,
    interpreted or compiled, portable, runs under linux/unix/windows.
     
    tm, Nov 11, 2010
    #3
  4. lovecreatesbeauty

    Mark Bluemel Guest

    On 11/11/2010 04:27 AM, Eric Sosman wrote:
    > On 11/10/2010 11:06 PM, lovecreatesbeauty wrote:
    >> Is it possible for so many other scripts like sh, awk, php, perl and
    >> javascript:) to keep a smallest set of their basic syntax, built-in
    >> types, built-in operators, control structures as same as C languages's
    >> as possible?


    > 3) What on Earth are you talking about?


    Exactly
     
    Mark Bluemel, Nov 11, 2010
    #4
  5. On Nov 11, 4:06 am, lovecreatesbeauty <>
    wrote:
    > Is it possible

    [snip]
    > as possible?
    >


    Yes.

    Martin
     
    MartinBroadhurst, Nov 11, 2010
    #5
  6. lovecreatesbeauty

    Default User Guest

    "Eric Sosman" <> wrote in message
    news:ibfre5$9ji$-september.org...
    > On 11/10/2010 11:06 PM, lovecreatesbeauty wrote:


    > 3) What on Earth are you talking about?


    Have any of his posts ever made sense?



    Brian
    --
    Day 645 of the "no grouchy usenet posts" project.
    Current music playing: None.
     
    Default User, Nov 11, 2010
    #6
  7. lovecreatesbeauty

    BruceS Guest

    On Nov 11, 2:12 pm, Richard <> wrote:
    > "Default User" <> writes:
    > > "Eric Sosman" <> wrote in message
    > >news:ibfre5$9ji$-september.org...
    > >> On 11/10/2010 11:06 PM, lovecreatesbeauty wrote:

    >
    > >>     3) What on Earth are you talking about?

    >
    > > Have any of his posts ever made sense?

    >
    > > Brian

    >
    > Have any of yours actually helped with C rather than just piggy backing
    > behind Keith or Heathfield? Other than the net nannying ones of course
    > too.


    Yes, they have. I can't provide a specific instance, but I know that
    DU/Brian is one of the posters I read for useful information. HTH.
     
    BruceS, Nov 12, 2010
    #7
  8. In article <>,
    BruceS <> wrote:
    >On Nov 11, 2:12 pm, Richard <> wrote:
    >> "Default User" <> writes:
    >> > "Eric Sosman" <> wrote in message
    >> >news:ibfre5$9ji$-september.org...
    >> >> On 11/10/2010 11:06 PM, lovecreatesbeauty wrote:

    >>
    >> >>     3) What on Earth are you talking about?

    >>
    >> > Have any of his posts ever made sense?

    >>
    >> > Brian

    >>
    >> Have any of yours actually helped with C rather than just piggy backing
    >> behind Keith or Heathfield? Other than the net nannying ones of course
    >> too.

    >
    >Yes, they have. I can't provide a specific instance, but I know that
    >DU/Brian is one of the posters I read for useful information. HTH.


    Funny...

    Good satire.

    --
    Just for a change of pace, this sig is *not* an obscure reference to
    comp.lang.c...
     
    Kenny McCormack, Nov 13, 2010
    #8
  9. On Nov 11, 6:06 am, lovecreatesbeauty <>
    wrote:
    > Is it possible for so many other scripts like sh, awk, php, perl and
    > javascript:) to keep a smallest set of their basic syntax, built-in
    > types, built-in operators, control structures as same as C languages's
    > as possible?
    >

    That's the way things are gradually going. Unfortunately programming
    conventions aren't yet firmly established, so we've got to put up with
    1-based and zero-based indexing, != ~= and <> for the inequality
    operator, and so on.
     
    Malcolm McLean, Nov 14, 2010
    #9
  10. On Nov 14, 12:54 pm, Malcolm McLean <>
    wrote:
    > On Nov 11, 6:06 am, lovecreatesbeauty <>
    > wrote:> Is it possible for so many other scripts like sh, awk, php, perl and
    > > javascript:) to keep a smallest set of their basic syntax, built-in
    > > types, built-in operators, control structures as same as C languages's
    > > as possible?

    >
    > That's the way things are gradually going. Unfortunately programming
    > conventions aren't yet firmly established, so we've got to put up with
    > 1-based and zero-based indexing, != ~= and <> for the inequality
    > operator, and so on.


    Will keeping same operators, data types, control structures, etc. same
    as C for new languages be harder to implement this language for
    compiler designers?

    Or will doing this make the new one become exact C?
     
    lovecreatesbeauty, Nov 15, 2010
    #10
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Rob Hughes
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    285
    Rob Hughes
    Jan 1, 2004
  2. Rajat
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    703
    Jorgen Grahn
    Jan 8, 2010
  3. VYAS ASHISH M-NTB837
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    565
    Jan Kaliszewski
    Jan 7, 2010
  4. lovecreatesbeauty

    The end of C-like script languages - C script with TCC

    lovecreatesbeauty, May 20, 2011, in forum: C Programming
    Replies:
    19
    Views:
    1,325
    Malcolm McLean
    Jun 19, 2011
  5. Diego
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    151
    Stefan Rusterholz
    Aug 16, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page