Post AcNLBAQzAw8EW4egr2 by rml@functional.cafe
 (DIR) More posts by rml@functional.cafe
 (DIR) Post #AcNLB6VRmPK8KkiCFk by rml@functional.cafe
       2023-11-11T18:52:39Z
       
       0 likes, 1 repeats
       
       out of the new "modern #C" or "C+" or whatever languages like #zig (right), #hare (left) seems to be the nicest, at the language level at least. clean block structure is hugely underrated and otherwise nice languages that take it for granted to ensure you can donode.* = .{ .data = value, .next = null };if (this.end) |end| end.next = nodeelse this.start = node;this.end = node;...completely ruins a block's clarity with too much syntax, which is part of what makes C code very confusing depsite being a minimal language (I also think there is something nice about the way that C does it, but its nice because you've seen it forever, not because they were great design decisions)meanwhile I don't need to read anything about hare or even squint to read the code and understand whats happening.
       
 (DIR) Post #AcNLB8yEcLXVycCDOy by rml@functional.cafe
       2023-11-11T21:16:13Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       I feel like Drew DeVault, having spent a lot of time with both C and Go (which is actually really well designed, it just doesn't have any fancy stuff PL people love) has a pretty good sense of what about Go improves on C, while focusing on the simple important non-fancy stuff like let bindings, anonymous functions, and most importantly, pattern matching, which dramatically improve conciseness and legibility. And the biggest problems with C ultimately boil down to problems of legibility.
       
 (DIR) Post #AcNLBAQzAw8EW4egr2 by rml@functional.cafe
       2023-11-11T21:44:17Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       Honestly, looking at Hare code I feel more confident that I know what is going than equivalent C and I've used C all my life and have never even tried Hare lol.
       
 (DIR) Post #AcNLBBY71vQVySztbM by rml@functional.cafe
       2023-11-11T21:26:16Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @ekaitz_zarraga  I wonder what you think about Hare. I know you said Zig is still frustrating in the number of concepts it forces you to grapple with, and when I've looked at Zig code I've kinda felt the same way in the sense that sections of source code inevitably use weird syntax that I can't understand simply by reading it, and have to consult documentation. But the Hare snippet above is quite obvious, and thats a good thing; obviousness ultimately leads to elegance in programming.