Re:Evolving Java Without Changing the Language
by bad_user on Wednesday October 21, 2009 @02:41PM
(#895353)
Isn't that what compilers do?
I actually am thinking of writing a compiler for a custom language that will be translated to Java. It will be a lot like C#, but simplified, with a lot of the cruft removed (like the requirement to define a Main class with a static main, or the requirement that all code should be wrapped in a class, but reified generics is something I want although I'm not sure if it's feasible).
I don't like Duby, I don't like Ruby for that matter. Mostly because the syntax is not as extensible as I'd like and because the variables don't have lexical scope.
I actually am thinking of writing a compiler for a custom language that will be translated to Java. It will be a lot like C#, but simplified, with a lot of the cruft removed (like the requirement to define a Main class with a static main, or the requirement that all code should be wrapped in a class, but reified generics is something I want although I'm not sure if it's feasible).
I don't like Duby, I don't like Ruby for that matter. Mostly because the syntax is not as extensible as I'd like and because the variables don't have lexical scope.