Just Ignore This

Just ignore this.

Comments

[Jérôme Krell]

You could also contribute in already existing langues, which are going to mature over time i think.
Here some example. Maybe a good start would be to support crystal in the implementation for Windows. Or support zig writing the selfhosted compiler

Crystal: crystal-lang.org/
Zig: ziglang.org/

[SebasQuiroga]

Hi Unlimiter,

I support the idea of creating new fancy tools for the community, I am really passionate about it, but we indeed need strong fundamental reasons to do so.
If you just want to chillax and enjoying programming either a compiler or transpiler, hey! that's fantastic!!, just write a nice post about it and share it with the community 🥳, but be aware, it would probably be more educational that industrial .

Regards.

[Sergiy Yevtushenko]

I've played a bit around similar idea. I aready have a grammar and some examples. Feel free to contact me, if you're interested in what I already have.

[Roger Filomeno]

Wow if you could make a something like what copilot does and just execute plain English straight to binary (Maybe just train the AI straight to binary).

[Unlimiter]

I don't think English would make a good programming language.

[Stefano Novelli]

What’s wrong with the X language already exists? How many languages you already know to justify your needs?
Just clarify, I’m happy to see enthusiasm for any new project, but maybe more info about your idea can be useful

[Unlimiter]

I wanna make a language with only the good stuff. I have medium-to-good experience with C, C++, JS, Lua, Python, Tcl, PowerShell and other shells. All of them have flaws. My ultimate goal is to fix all those flaws into one comfy package. Just imagine how it would feel like to code without ever getting hindered by the actual design of the language.

[Stefano Novelli]

And that's kind of the idea that all the big companies have. See Typescript (Microsoft), Golang/Kotlin (Google), Rust (Mozilla), Swift (Apple) etc... fix "old" (like all the ones you mentioned) and limiting languages.
Everyone wants to make a language only with "good stuff", and I don't think these big companies - with huge budgets and whole teams of engineers - enjoy making crappy languages.
If you really want to start this epochal work, I'd recommend you to throw down a whitepaper, providing the most valid reasons and your solutions to the respective problems. Then it will be hard to convince other programmers to learn your language.
But first, if I were you, I would better study my "competitors" such as Scala, Ruby, PHP, JS (the latest versions), Haskell, Elixir, Clojure, C# etc...

[Unlimiter]

I've worked with JS quite a lot. So I know it fairly well. And I know what I'm talking about when I say that sometimes I wish something was a different way. Also, I'm not trying to compete with other languages. I'm totally fine if literally only one other person uses my language, as long as they're satisfied with it. And if I end up the only one using it, that's fine too.

[Stefano Novelli]

I'm not questioning that you don't know what you're talking about, I'm just saying that you haven't explained the reasons for the limitations you've found.

What don't you like about Javascript? Being untyped? Being limited to memory access? Exploding when working with floating point numbers?

If you don't like the name "Javascript", or if you just want to make a language "because you want to" you are free to do so, but I don't think these are valid reasons.

[FJones]

Small nitpick: Everything in JS is a float, so it always explodes. :P

[FJones]

This, essentially. What's the USP of the language? What's the target application? "General-purpose" often falls into the jack-of-all-trades trap, and some languages are just far too entrenched in their domain to allow for particularly successful competition (e.g. JS vs Rust-to-wasm).

[anandsunderraman]

Wow this is interesting !!
It would be nice to understand high level needs .
One of my goals was to see if there is a language that can be self tested