Create a new programming language?

[Brandon X12000]

Yes I agree where would be the "appropriate" forum? could you be specific please...

[Pete OHanlon]

Don't worry about it. The regulars think this one's fine.

Forgive your enemies - it messes with their heads

"Mind bleach! Send me mind bleach!" - Nagy Vilmos

My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Mole 2010 - debugging made easier - my favourite utility

[Member 8331185]

I have always wanted to see a language based on the English language but without all the grammatical bollocks so that you could program almost as easily as you would speak I.E. for every value in the statement Hello my name is john count the number of spaces this would return 4 what is the length of the statement Hello my name is john this would return 21 add 5 to the length of the statement Hello my name is john and store the result in container name this would store the value 26 in the variable called name add 36 to the container name would result in 62 being stored in the variable called name. Empty the container name. would clear out the variable called name Empty all containers would clear the contents of all variables in memory. You get the idea...... The disadvantages - its quite terse and takes a lot of typing. The advantages - any idiot can walk up to a PC and provided they can read and write in the English language they should be able to begin programming. It stops the leaning towards the txt spk shortening of the English language used by mobile phone users and might actually stem the tide a wee bit. Its completely readable and pretty much self commenting, again if you can read in the english language you can read a program. It should be relatively easy to write a compiler for due to the ease of the syntax. Your thoughts?

[Rob Grainger]

Nagy Vilmos wrote:

Not many modern languages are domain specific

Yeah, except the one that the entire Web is built on (HTML). And the one we use to access databases (SQL), and the one's we use to script (PowerShell, BASH, ...), and ...

[Rob Grainger]

PIEBALDconsult wrote:

Only within certain limits. Make it do what you need it to do and then add features as needed or requested

I disagree - the most successful general purpose programming languages have a minimal set of features but allow libraries to extend the language to a degree. C, Smalltalk and LISP spring to mind.

[Rob Grainger]

Actually read an article recently where the author adopted a "from base" approach to language and O/S issues, I think he used an assembler though. I can't imagine any sane individual trying to write machine code. (You could even view hexadecimal as a language to facilitate entry of binary data).

[Nagy Vilmos]

I dig to befer: HTML - specific to the solution - web pages - but not the content. SQL - specific to databases but not to the data stored. Scripts - specific to the OS as a maximum but not the usage. I think you are confusing what the languages do - web, db, scripts - to what they are used for - banking, retail, pron.

---

Panic, Chaos, Destruction. My work here is done. Drink. Get drunk. Fall over - P O'H OK, I will win to day or my name isn't Ethel Crudacre! - DD Ethel Crudacre I cannot live by bread alone. Bacon and ketchup are needed as well. - Trollslayer Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb - they're often *students*, for heaven's sake - Terry Pratchett

[KP Lee]

There's also garbage collection when you are through with that instance, though it's more flushing than collection.

[smcnulty2000]

I had a lot of fun reading this book. Constructing Language Processors for Little Languages, Randy M Kaplan. I think if you want to understand the nature of why computer languages get produced you can do so by seeing what thought process goes into a specialty language. Regarding an "all purpose" language; well there's something to be said for there being a reason in specializing. You could make one that could do everything but it would probably do everything poorly. This is sort of like asking to make a vehicle that is both a racecar and a large truck for hauling dirt. It wouldn't outrace a real racecar, it wouldn't haul more dirt than a large truck. And if you could build a racecar that could haul dirt and still outrace other racecars you could probably build an even better racecar that didn't haul dirt.

_____________________________ Give a man a mug, he drinks for a day. Teach a man to mug... The difference between an ostrich and the average voter is where they stick their heads.

[KP Lee]

Collin Jasnoch wrote:

Anyone can right a language form the ground up.

Even fixing the spelling, I disagree with that one. This one "programmer" I knew managed to break the C compiler so badly it didn't give a hint about why it was dying. He can't even code in an established language, I find it totally unbelievable he has the chops to create a language. Or at least one that makes a little bit of sense.

[KP Lee]

Member 8331185 wrote:

for every value in the statement Hello my name is john count the number of spaces
this would return 4

This stretches the capabilities of a compiler beyond reason. If I count the number of spaces in the statement, it comes to 15. That's because I am only seeing one continuous run-on statement.

Member 8331185 wrote:

The disadvantages - its quite terse and takes a lot of typing.

Actually, it's quite verbose. "get answer:Hello my name is john" is terse and also requires psychic capabilities. :) (Get me the answer I want, not the answer to the question I ask. Intuitively know I meant "it's" when I wrote "its". Come to think about it, WORD is pretty good at that now.)

[Slacker007]

KP Lee wrote:

There's also garbage collection when you are through with that instance, though it's more flushing than collection.

I thought the same thing after I posted. Good catch. :)

Just along for the ride. "the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011)

[Brandon X12000]

Do you know any books or references about binary or machine code? or perhaps assembly code? Like lets say a book that says a line of 1's and 0's for each command(s)...

[KP Lee]

Slacker007 wrote:

Good catch

Ewww! :)

[PhilipOakley]

Go FORTH and multiply. It has everything.

[paul_the_kelly]

HTML isn't a programming language. It isn't Turing complete, and thus can't be used to implement arbitrary algorithms.

[Kerrash]

Yes. Pen an paper like Ada Lovelace had to. Assuming you don't want to get all meta-physical and disregard the syntax of the langauage you are writing it in and math as the langauge of the universe...

[Kerrash]

Ambiguity of identifiers would be a big concern for me. How would the system know what you meant by a container? Or where a statement started or ended without punctuation?

[vl2]

There is a relatively short and cheap bootstrapping chain: 1) Implement the simplest Forth on top of machine codes. With a bit of experience it can be done in several days. 2) On top of this Forth, implement a simple Lisp interpeter 3) Using the Lisp interpreter, implement Lisp compiler and re-bootstrap it 4) Grow this Lisp using macros to the stage when it is easy to implement any kind of compilers. This will include building parser generators (e.g., something similar to Parsec), tree visitor generator (in line with Haskell library "Scrap your boilerplate"), number of graph algorithms (e.g., dominator tree building, etc.) 5) Implement an intermediate VM using that Lisp, something similar to LLVM (i.e., SSA-based), implement a native backend for this VM. 6) Implement any language you like on top of that VM All the steps are relatively trivial and well-defined, and there is a lot of papers and books that will help on each stage.

[Stefan_Lang]

What language would you like that book in - would binary suit you? ;) But seriously: machine code is, as the name implies, machine dependend. Or, more to the point, dependent on the CPU. AMD and Intel have different machine code, as does the PowerPC line, or the various risk processors. New multicore processors have commands that none of the older have, simply because they don't have multiple cores. Basically, every CPU that comes with a new feature, comes with a new machine command, or several of them. So, if you have a specific CPU in mind, like that in your own computer, find out it's precise name, and look for books or articles on that CPU. I think I still somewhere have an MC 68000 Assembler book for the like-named processor, back from the time when I owned an AMIGA. ;)