Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The Slate Programming Language

Posted by CowboyNeal on from the languages-named-after-microsoft-sites dept.

An anonymous reader writes "I know that we have had an influx of new programming languages of late, but I feel that this one merits special attention. Theoretical computer scientists and long-time Squeak and LISP contributors Brian Rice and Lee Salzman have been rapidly developing a language called Slate. It draws on the various strengths of the Self, Smalltalk, and LISP languages. To quote from the website: 'Slate is a prototype-based object-oriented programming language based on Self, CLOS, and Smalltalk. Slate syntax is intended to be as familiar as possible to a Smalltalker, rather than engaging in divergent experiments in that respect.' The beta release is currently being written in Common LISP."

5 of 244 comments (clear)

  1. What I use to satisfy my needs... by ArseneLuppin · · Score: 0, Troll

    ;-)

  2. Re:Ah, great, Smalltalk by Deraj+DeZine · · Score: 1, Troll

    And while you're at it, why don't you learn Esperanto and the Dvorak keyboard layout? You sheep obviously have nothing else better to do.

    --
    True story.
  3. Lisp vs Smalltalk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll
    They are trying to combine Smalltalk and Lisp into one offspring. I have to ask. What does Lisp have that Smalltalk does not have? I could easily list things that Smalltalk has, but Lisp doesn't:
    • libraries ("talk small, carry a big library")
    • extensibility in readable form (you can extend Lisp with macros, but it stays unreadable usually)
    • industry backing (well, compared to Common Lisp anyway)
    • really good IDEs (no, Emacs does not make a really good IDE - it's decent after you've configred everything, but not realy good)
  4. BCPL by rice_burners_suck · · Score: 0, Troll
    I just came up with the most extraordinary idea. Why not make up a programming language where { and } are used to denote the beginning and end of a block, respectively, and expressions are terminated with a semicolon. That would be a HUGE improvement over the current languages of today, which look a lot like:
    LD1 I
    LDA BASE(0:2)
    STA *+1(0:2)
    You get the picture... (The year is 1967 right now, isn't it?)
  5. Maybe I'm just feeling cranky by crucini · · Score: 0, Troll

    Do we need yet another impractical language? Look, Perl started off solving problems in the real world and was then developed into a "real" language. These pie-in-the-sky types all have the same problem, and Larry Wall nailed it. They're inventing a language around some theoretical idea, rather than looking at what works in the real world and gently enhancing it.

    Even if the main idea is a great one, the language always sucks because it is too much enslaved to that one idea.

    And the funniest part is that the language of the week is always on a web site served up by C/C++ and (Linux|Windows).