Thoughts about the ideal programming language

[Dennis Ritchie via Digitalmars-d]

On Thursday, 14 May 2015 at 06:02:37 UTC, thedeemon wrote:
> On Wednesday, 13 May 2015 at 18:59:42 UTC, Dennis Ritchie wrote:
>>http%3A%2F%2Fhabrahabr.ru%2Fpost%2F257875%2F
>
> Just some usual C++ critique and very vague basic principles 
> about having a core language with some extensions and library 
> support, nothing constructive or informative really.

The author develops his own ideal programming language and is 
based on his tongue D. Actually, currently the best candidate for 
the common languages - this is D, which proves this article.

"I agree completely. I among evernote-notes, where I keep the 
idea of ​​the differences in programming languages, rather big 
section is dedicated IDE; the design language to take into 
account a bunch of IDE (in particular, the syntax of the language 
should be structured in such a way that it is convenient to work 
avtokompilitu, Tree Builder classes and other tools IDE, which 
should work "on the fly"); I did point out specific 
recommendations to the IDE, by organizing projects, etc., which 
are usually in the language is not included. And one of the first 
things with which I began experimenting with my compiler (fork D) 
- is to write a simple IDE for Qt and do visualizer AST (and then 
will visualizers all transformations within the compiler, up to 
the code generator). That is not only to use the compiler, but 
even without it razrarabyvat GUI uncomfortable."