Re: State of the compiler market

[Lucretia <laguest9000@googlemail.com>]

On Thursday, 29 June 2017 13:23:56 UTC+1, gautier...@hotmail.com  wrote:

> > God no!
> 
> No to what ?...

The current string mess. Remove it all and start again.

> > Remove character and string from standard. Introduce code_points and unicode strings, add "net" packages, add "xml" packages. Basically all the text based stuff the modern world uses and every other language gets for free.
> 
> Sure. Note that xml is already since a while an "old fad", but this would be clearly needed for legacy stuff. Everybody think to those xml-based zombies that eat resources on enterprise servers...
> 

Hardly legacy when people are using it for all types of config file stuff, even new stuff.

> > Add a "UI" package so that we can do Object Pascal type stuff easily. Ada can easily do UI or graphics, yet all that stuff in planes is handled by C++, why?
> 
> At least on the ground there are many UI options, but they are too specific IHMO to be frozen into a standard. But with Beb, you can try it now and see how it works!

It would get people going much faster, people like ui's, they like to be able to
see a window and then mess about with controls, then moving to GL and the like. People like graphics. Enable them.
 
> > That's just a start, but this would really need to be a new language in the same vein as Ada, not a fork.
> 
> It could be a new language reusing the experience and testing accumulated with Ada.

Yup, think this would be best, imo.

I'd also simplify the compilation process, have a program which with's it's packages, compile. Don't bother with this whole allow the compiler to take multiple compilation units all at the same time, allow separate compilation, just not the way it is now, it's confusing.

Luke.