On 15 September 2013 21:12, Nick Sabalausky <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 15:03:04 -0300 > Ary Borenszweig <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 9/13/13 7:51 PM, Justin Whear wrote: >> > Just ran across this: http://www.zimbu.org/ >> > A language by Bram Moolenaar (original author and maintainer of >> > vim). The "Why Zimbu?" section on the right side of the homepage has >> > comparisons to other languages. D is the last comparison, >> > suggesting that it meets all the other qualifications but fails on >> > "It has to run on most systems, anything with a C compiler, so D is >> > out." >> > >> > Note: I'm fine with D not running absolutely everywhere, I only >> > write it on linux for linux. >> > >> >> I DON'T KNOW why, but I find it SOMEHOW hard or annoying TO READ... > > Funny Id noticed THE same thing too } Which IS strange lack OF > punctuation normally makes things easier TO read doesnt it } > > But I imagine you'd probably get used to those things pretty quicky, > though. It's just syntax, after all. But holding SHIFT all the time may > be harder to get used to. I've done plenty of all-caps keywords back in > my BASIC days, and I can't say I miss it - or that I find it in any way > easier to read. > > I don't like the idea of language-enforced style. I do understand the > rationale, but to me it's just minutia that has no business being > nanny-supervised. > > Zimbu's actually been around for quite some time now. I first came > across it several years ago when trying to find a modern native systems > language that wasn't C/C++. I moved on in favor of D because Zumba > seemed to be in much more of an early experimental state. Looks > like it's further along now, but not as much as I would have guessed. > Maybe all the attention on D/Rust/Go already sucked up most potential > contributors? >
Well, ZImbu gets a -42 out of 10 for code readability and maintainability. :-) https://code.google.com/p/zimbu/source/browse/zimbu2c.c -- Iain Buclaw *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';
