Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 26th Nov 2005 17:02 UTC, submitted by Megatux
Gnome "I followed the debate about a successor for the C/C++ combination as the primary language for developing the GNOME core desktop platform very closely last month. There has been discussion about a number of options. What I would like to do on this page is give an overview how a probably less well-known language might be a viable compromise as a C/C++ successor. This language is called Eiffel and exists for over a decade. Eiffel takes the principle of Object-Oriented programming to its extremes and, as a consequence, is a very easy to learn language."
Thread beginning with comment 65025
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Bind me!
by test on Sat 26th Nov 2005 19:10 UTC
test
Member since:
2005-07-06

I think the author was joking, right? Why not use an even lesser known language than Eiffel. As a joke I just thought of Forth. And then I thought about one of its derivatives: Display PostScript, which sounds like the right language to use with a Desktop Environment...

Seriously why reinvent the wheel, and why select a language that has fewer bindings than others? C suits me very well, as well as to all those who use any language of THEIR CHOICE to bind to the GNOME API.

Keep C.

Next!

Edited 2005-11-26 19:20

Reply Score: 1

RE: Bind me!
by on Sat 26th Nov 2005 19:50 in reply to "Bind me!"
Member since:

I agree with you. It sounds to me more like a joke than a serious "RFC".

From the article:
This language is called Eiffel and exists for over a decade
Well, acording to the link to Wikipedia, it is two decades.

Eiffel takes the principle of Object-Oriented programming to its extremes and, as a consequence, is a very easy to learn language.
OOP != "easy to learn" IMHO

It seems that all requirements for the language of choice are fullfilled by C/C++ so, why change?

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE: Bind me!
by ma_d on Sat 26th Nov 2005 21:48 in reply to "Bind me!"
ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

The thought has occurred to me. Maybe it's a good limiting factor to only support C (especially if all language bindings dissappeared). Then you'd have to say "ok, is it worth it to write my own bindings for the stuff I need to do this in the language I want?"

What would happen? Fewer programs would be written, of course. But do we really want programs written by people who lack committment?

Just a thought. The reality of language bindings (which is a given with the sharing attitude in this community) sort of negates the idea as plausible. But I think the thought is important: We shouldn't be picking a language for beginners and ease of developing small programs. We need a language that helps people who know what they're doing.

Those articles that bytecoder posted by Paul Graham are very good. Everyone should read both ;) . Especially the arc one: http://www.paulgraham.com/noop.html .

And this section, of this: http://www.paulgraham.com/popular.html; wraps up why I don't like Eiffel:
"It is a mistake to try to baby the user with long-winded expressions that are meant to resemble English. Cobol is notorious for this flaw. A hacker would consider being asked to write

add x to y giving z

instead of

z = x+y"

Compare to:
"from i := 0 until i >= 10 loop
my_array.put (0, i)
i := i + 1
end"

There is an exception to his rule though, SQL. Of course, SQL is intended for non-programmers as well.

It's not really a big deal to type the extra stuff, it's just annoying to read. Scanning through and seeing "loop" verse "end" is difficult: And if your editor can highlight it for you then why did you use so many characters for it anyway?
It also feels redundant to type what is obviously a foreach loop and still have to say "loop." If it's compiled, syntactic things like this are just obnoxious to the user; if it's JIT that's another story.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[2]: Bind me!
by jayson.knight on Sat 26th Nov 2005 22:20 in reply to "RE: Bind me!"
jayson.knight Member since:
2005-07-06

If it was just an "average" user writing the code (as is the case with SQL statements on a fairly regular basis) I would agree with you...we're all (hopefully) highly trained professionals though, and the whole number of LOC debate is moot given the amount of help any decent IDE will give us at this point in writing code (and catching lots of stuff at compile time now). The example you gave is grossly exagerated as no developer on the planet would write that loop.

I have to be a smartass and say this about COBOL (as horrific of a language as it is): if "Cobol is notorious for this flaw" then why are there more lines of COBOL code in production than any other language combined? The obvious answer is that there weren't that many options at the time of COBOL's hayday, but it was also it's verboseness that made it easy to program in (Visual Basic anyone?)...granted the quality of code might be low, but in general, languages suited to business (IT) use gain a bit from expressiveness as it usually fits the domain the language is being used in, which is why as great of a language as I think Eiffel is, it's geared more towards business use; I can't possibly see it being used for something as low level as GNOME.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Bind me!
by CaptainPinko on Sun 27th Nov 2005 00:04 in reply to "RE: Bind me!"
CaptainPinko Member since:
2005-07-21

You are a misinformed troll, just look at the following link. Anyone can make any language look bad if they want to.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobol#Defense

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Bind me!
by unoengborg on Sun 27th Nov 2005 02:04 in reply to "Bind me!"
unoengborg Member since:
2005-07-06

Even thought C is a well known language right now, I think it could be a problem in the long run.

Today, most people who learn how to program, do so in some object oriented language and universities use languages like java or C# in their entry level programming courses. Most courses on software development and design focus on OO priciples.

This means that new developers may be less interested in Gnome and Gtk. Besides, GUI stuff is very well suited for OO development and people with current education will recognize this and get the feeling that Gnome and gtk is some kind of ghost from the past.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Bind me!
by on Sun 27th Nov 2005 02:35 in reply to "RE: Bind me!"
Member since:


Even thought C is a well known language right now, I think it could be a problem in the long run.

Today, most people who learn how to program, do so in some object oriented language and universities use languages like java or C# in their entry level programming courses. Most courses on software development and design focus on OO priciples.

Whether or not that's a good thing is debatable...

Besides, GUI stuff is very well suited for OO development and people with current education will recognize this and get the feeling that Gnome and gtk is some kind of ghost from the past.

That may be, if only because GUI programming is a rare case where screwing it up in OOP is virtually impossible to do.

-bytecoder

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[2]: Bind me!
by ma_d on Sun 27th Nov 2005 03:23 in reply to "RE: Bind me!"
ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

Gtk is highly OO. I suggest you look at it.

Those c machines don't run c++ by magic. Some object things in c are *much* more confusing than say Java (nothing is more confusing than c++).

Reply Parent Score: 0