Many tried and still trying, but all of them failed. There is still nothing more minimalist and better than ANSI C89.
Change my mind.
inb4:
>muh web development
There are shitload of various gateway interfaces. You can make backend on C.
>muh GUI apps.
Again, shitload of libraries especially nuklear that was written in C89 and uses opengl.
>muh OOP.
Structs dude. OOP is a meme.
Scheme
There exists inaccessible programming languages, and what do you think about HolyC?
>OOP is a meme.
>Structs dude.
If you're implementing an object system in C, you're kinda conceding the point.
>that cnile who thinks his memelang is the be all end all of systems programming
Forth
I think Go achived what C set out to do. Sure Go will never have a place in the embedded sphere or low level systems programming, but for web servers, middleware and damn near everything else I think it does a pretty bang up job.
It even sidesteps the whole Object model in favour of saner abstractions.
>Limbo
>Go
The "saner" abstractions are just a gay version of typeclasses
There's a reason most gamedev studios are gradually switching from C++ to C. OOP doesn't map at all to computers.
>minimalist
I want maximalism of expressiveness and verbosity, not some jumbled ambiguous mess. Come back when you're smart enough for a thinking man's language.
The smaller the language, the most expressive it can be.
Lisps are perhaps the most expressive class of languages and the syntax for those is nothing more than parens.
>There's a reason most gamedev studios are gradually switching from C++ to C.
no they aren't retard
they switched from C to C++ in the 90s and nobody is switching back
The fewer keywords you can use, the more ambiguous your code per-line. There are no two ways around this, a #define can stand as a guard, a function macro, a named literal, etc.
And who the hell wants to use void*?
I'm not sure what you know what expressiveness means in terms of programming.
If you truly are a minimalist, then post your castration, afterall, it's not like you use anything down there right? Minimalism is why tech is so shitty today. It's why we have notches in our phones, but no notification LEDs. It's why Windows 10 is the way it is. Your minimalism is cancer.
To me it means mapping what is in my mind onto the computer in the most accurate way. What is it to you?
I agree with this definition.
Too much syntax and too many features get in the way of this goal. When you start thinking about the language's semantics rather than the code's, you have poor expressiveness. There's a reason Lisps are famed for DSLs.
All it takes is to read A Tour Of C++ and some standard library documentation, and you're done.
It has saved me countless hours. Call me when glibc has all of this.
>All it takes is to read A Tour Of C++ and some standard library documentation, and you're done.
You're a C++ layman. You have no idea how deep the rabbit hole goes, and you have no idea what real expressiveness looks like.
this
I'm not a layman, I've worked on enterprise software before. Despite this I always recommend people that book.
>I've worked on enterprise software before
heh.
A Tour of C++ is good for getting to grips with the language, but it's just that - a tour. C++ has so many dark corners that even Stroustrup's several times larger "The C++ Programming Language" misses shit out.
Okay what do you have in mind?
Dennis Ritchie - Write in C
youtube.com
>no namespaces
>no compile time conversion checks
>no templates
into the trash it goes
>more minimalist
BCPL
As an example, I discovered about a week ago that C++ allows you to use templates as template parameters.
I haven't seen this mentioned anywhere but it proved to be incredibly useful for compile time evaluation since it basically gave you access to higher order functions at the type level.
I've never seen it mentioned or used anywhere before that, even though it's been part of C++ since C++98.
C++ is full of dark corners and you're blind if you can't see them.
What's wrong with C99 or C11?
Does this also mean that BrainFuck is the most expressive programming language?
Fuck off. archive.is
>suckless
God that's spot on.
Expressiveness is more than just minimalism. It's a turing tarpit.
With an extremely simple concept like e.g. a closure, you can elegantly express high level control flow concepts and abstraction techniques. The goal is to express the most as clearly as possible with as few builtin concepts as possible.
>source: my ass
>Structs dude
Yeah good luck using inheritance and methods with that. Sure you can try to replicate it but why not just use cpp for OOP?
Go is the worst possible C replacement that exists now, as it avoids as many forms of potential advantage from expressability as it can.
The improvements made to D in the past year have put it way beyond Go's level.
what improvements are you talking about?
>Go
not using white mans ASP.NET Core C#
