From: Mark Probert <probertm@...>
Date: 2005-07-29T03:16:57+09:00
Subject: [OT] languages (was: Re: Next Official Ruby Version)


Hi ..

On Thu, 2005-07-28 at 18:04 +0900, Lothar Scholz wrote:

> No. It's beta. 

That was also my take on it.  Though some of the semantics and included
libraries are nice.  Certainly an improvement on C++.

> 
> Well, tell me where are the alternatives ?
> 
> Show me some for a higher level language that does not have the
> gotchas of C++, will work for large projects ... compiles to native 
> executable, is statically typed,
> has a garbage collector and is available on MacOSX,Linux,Win32 ?
> 
ocaml?  Not that I have used it in anger ...


> A C# compiler that does not generate .NET code would be nice but
> its not there.
> 
Or an Oberon-2 compiler without the junk and with decent libraries.

;-)

Regards,

-- 
-mark.  (probertm at acm dot org)