Re: Ideal computer language from scratch?


Evenbit wrote:
JGCASEY wrote:
randyhyde@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

A useful new language would be one that gives power to
the part time programmer without losing the above need
for efficient use of machine resources, in particular
speed which is the failure of all HLLs.

Microsoft advertises its visual tools as the answer to this target
base.

They haven't helped the speed at which the program runs as I
found out when I tried to set a pixel value from VC++, same
speed as QBasic and more **&#@*$ about to create a screen
to set the pixel in the first place.


This includes
VC++ *and* Assembler which is as slow as QBasic thanks
to the Windoze OS.

Virtual Memory Management and Virtualised I/O are the only things
(ignoring Multitasking for the moment) in the OS that slow your
applications down. To speed them up, you design the app to adapt to
this environment better.

Sure there are complex hard to
learn ways around it but this is, as you state above
(see requirement 2), exactly what makes these languages
VC++ and Assembler crap when it comes to giving a part
time programmer access to the PC resources.

A first-time spread*** designer has the same exact access to PC
resources -- it is the amount of *control* over those resources that
differs. Even a beginning Assembly programmer has far more control
over these resources than the most advanced VC++ enduser.

An assembler programmer doesn't seem to have any more control
over resources than other languages in the sense it still has to call
the API's and do all the paper work required, that takes a long time
to work out, before anything can happen.

--
JC

.