Inheritance of purity

David d at
Fri Feb 24 03:03:40 PST 2012

Am 24.02.2012 11:43, schrieb Walter Bright:
> On 2/23/2012 4:01 PM, F i L wrote:
>> Well then I disagree with Walter on this as well. What's wrong with
>> having a
>> "standard" toolset in the same way you have standard libraries? It's
>> unrealistic
>> to think people (at large) will be writing any sort of serious
>> application
>> outside of a modern IDE. I'm not saying it's Walters job to write IDE
>> integration, only that the language design shouldn't cater to the smaller
>> use-case scenario.
> Do you really want a language that the source code isn't readable or
> browsable outside of an IDE?
> Like the switch from command line to GUI, perhaps there are some that
> are ready to switch from text files to some visually graphy thingy for
> source code. But D ain't such a language. I don't know what such a
> language would look like. I've never thought much about it before,
> though I heard there was a toy language for kids that you "programmed"
> by moving boxes around on the screen.

I think you mean Robot Karol, but this uses also a basic like syntax.

More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list