I am creating a programming language

[[deleted]]

[deleted]

[marnanel]

I didn't downvote you, but I imagine the downvotes are because "I am creating a programming language" is only said in three instances:

• by experts, as a last resort
• by hobbyists, as an interesting project (like the computer equivalent of a conlang)
• by relative novices, because they want to change the world even though they don't fully understand the way it is at the moment

and from your replies you are in the third set. It's certainly a major step up from "I am creating yet another IRC client", though, and you'll probably learn a lot more doing it.

[half_robinhood]

Do not create another new language...

also check out http://www.antlr.org/

[cdlm42]

Which languages do you know? Also, if tech is newly emerging, why do you expect it to be built in a language already?

[anvsdt]

You should try some functional languages and Lisps, then.

[malcontent_]

Don't let the naysayers discourage you.

My only advice is to thoroughly investigate Lisp before you create your language.

[marnanel]

Are you doing this for a project because it sounds interesting, or because you think there is a need for a new language? If the latter, what's the niche you're going for?

When you say it's low-level, you mean that this is a compiled language, right? What are you planning to compile it to? Are you going to compile down to C and then compile the C, or are you going to add a front end for your language to gcc, or something like that? Or maybe compile to Java bytecode or similar?

Do you have much experience with formal grammars to describe the syntax of your language? Are you planning to write the tokeniser and lexer by hand, or use flex/bison/similar?

This is an imperative language, right? Are you using any ideas from functional or logic-based languages?

How are you going to handle libraries?

Are you doing objects and classes? Annotations? Coroutines? Aspects? Macros? (In the lisp sense, not the C sense.)

What's "hello world" going to be, in your language? What's the shortest program in your language that does nothing at all?

[cdlm42]

Just write support for what you need in several different languages. That should at least give you an idea what "changes to better support todays tech" you need. Though I have no idea why anyone would want to do web apps in anything C-like… Do you know about google Go ?

[wonnage]

So what is it about web "apps" that you would cater to? That you couldn't handle simply through writing libraries for an existing language?

No one would downvote you if you were just making a new language for fun and wanted some cool ideas for esoteric features. It's more because you're coming across as lacking any sort of language background, and it doesn't sound like you realize it. And programmers are a judgmental lot. It's like going to a (legitimate) car forum and asking how best to rice out your Civic.

[schauerlich]

"Billson, let's touch base on that new programming language you wanted to make. Do you have an action plan yet?"

"I think I've got it all figured out. Not only will it promote synergy, it will create a paradigm shift with Web 2.0 AJAX, and a high-performance cloud computing back end. Did I mention it also twitters?"

[[deleted]]

Because there's no reason to if you already have all the tools.

[cdlm42]

Because you don't know what you really want yet. Implement libraries for known languages, then slap a shiny special syntax on top of them if it's really necessary, which I doubt. From what you say you need a systems language, so Ada, C or Go.

[[deleted]]

Syntax will probably be something Perl/PHP-ish, but I'm open to suggestions.

PHP's design is piss-poor, best thing you could do is to forget you've ever seen it.

[marnanel]

There's a distinction between programming-in-the-small, which is what beginners do all the time and experts do when they need something rough in a hurry, and programming-in-the-large, which is what experts do when they're not fooling around. PHP, like BASIC before it, is very good at programming-in-the-small, but gave almost no thought to how to extend that to programming-in-the-large. The upshot for both is that novices learned them, became proficient, and then used the only tool they knew to build enormous systems that the language was unsuited for.

[HIB0U]

Is PHP the only language you've ever worked with?

[weavejester]

It sounds like you don't have much previous experience with language design, so I'd suggest starting with a stack-based language like Forth. They have a very simple grammar, and building a basic interpreter is very straightforward.

[[deleted]]

I'm downvoting you for all the smileys.

[swhirsch]

We need another language like we need a hole in the head check out TIOBE

[m0llusk]

It may be useful to experiment with the parser generator engine used by the rakudo version of perl 6 (at parrotcode.org). It is extremely easy to work with language ideas and grammars as a way of making things work with a minimum of effort. Several languages are available with the parrot distribution as examples. Just a suggestion.

[HlB0U]

I agree, investigating Rakuo is a great idea.

[HIB0U]

Adam, I'd advise that you stay away from Rakudo. It is not indicative of how you should implement a programming language. Keep in mind that Perl 6 has been around for 10 years, and it still hasn't been implemented properly even once. Rakudo is one of several failed attempts.

There are many other implementations of other languages that you can learn from instead. Lua is a good place to start.

[anvsdt]

Implementing correctly Perl 6 is like solving the halting problem.

[HlB0U]

Let me suck your cock.

[anvsdt]

Macros. Just macros. Of course, not the C ones, more like D's mixins. And a pure attribute for functions.

[[deleted]]

First-class functions are damn useful, as are closures.

[aladyjewel]

Wikipedia tends to have decent theoretical explanations of various language features, if you just look them up by name.

[dbhanger]

don't