Ooc: new awesome language with site redesign, guide, and screencast

http://ooc-lang.org

by gmaster1440 • 16 years ago

30 44 16 years ago

ooc-lang.org

gdl• 16 years ago

Not to be confused with "Ook!" http://esolangs.org/wiki/Ook!

This is like "Go" / "Go!" all over again, except more people have probably heard of "Ook!".

mhd• 16 years ago

You think that people who monkey around with eso-langs are in danger of confusing the two?

mbreese• 16 years ago

Probably not, since Ook was designed for orangutans. However, those orangutans would probably take offense to describing their work as 'monkey'ing around since avoiding that word is one of the design principles.

http://www.dangermouse.net/esoteric/ook.html

mahmud• 16 years ago

Or Orc, which keeps to hold my fascination since I first discovered it, weeks ago.

http://orc.csres.utexas.edu/

Hopefully I will have more time for it and SR:

http://www.cs.arizona.edu/sr/

pierrefar2• 16 years ago

ooc is a ... high-level, low-level programming language.

Can someone please explain how it can be both?

nddrylliog9• 16 years ago

It can be very expressive and high-level when you just want to get stuff done - but it also allows you to get down to the bare metal in case you have to/want to.

You can turn off the GC, control when and how the memory gets allocated, use pointers to deal with raw memory blocks, easily link with ASM, and the consuming features are easy to avoid - leaving you with a nicer syntax for C. Of course, in the real world you probably want to find a compromise and not go 'full metal'.

pierrefar2• 16 years ago

Thanks. Makes sense now.

albertzeyer7• 16 years ago

C++, as an example, can also be both.

nddrylliog9• 16 years ago

I agree that C++ can be very low-level. As far as being high-level.. it's still desperately stuck years in the past, even with all the bloat C++0x (or whatever it's actually called) brings to it =)

</troll> (with a hint of truth)

albertzeyer7• 16 years ago

Why not LLVM? Some language compiling to C99 seems kind of outdated since we have LLVM. (And if C99 is really wanted, LLVM can output that too. Whereby nobody really is keeping that up-to-date because noone really is interested in it.)

gmaster14405• 16 years ago

rock, ooc's compiler, supports compilation with clang ;)

albertzeyer7• 16 years ago

You mean ooc -> (rock ->) C -> (clang ->) llvm?

I mean ooc -> llvm.

Not only that it is obviously faster and simpler, it is also better to maintain and better to optimise. And it gives more power and possibilities to the ooc compiler.

elbenshira• 16 years ago

I've been following Ooc for a long time, mostly because I liked the syntax. It's a weird blend of C and Ruby.

nddrylliog, I think you should make the "jump to" navigation easier to find in the intro guide.

gmaster14405• 16 years ago

Made it larger on the opening page ;)

albertzeyer7• 16 years ago

The introduction guide HTML rendering is annoying. It needs at least a width of 1280. I usually keep my browser window width at about 700, sometimes even less.

MoreMoschops2• 16 years ago

I use C++ and Objective-C, sometimes both at once (go go gadget GCC). I've had a look through the OOC website - does OOC offer me anything I don't already have?

postfuturist• 16 years ago

Sexy syntax. C++ and Objective-C both have the superset-of-C ugliness.

MoreMoschops2• 16 years ago

Well I'm sold.

WarTheatre• 16 years ago

"ooc is a modern, self-hosting, object-oriented, functional, high-level, low-level programming language. It strives to be powerful, modular, extensible, portable, yet simple and fast. ooc translates to C99 via rock, our self-hosting compiler."

Is this for real? Because it sounds like someone is overselling their langauge way too much.

gmaster14405• 16 years ago

yes, very much for real, feel free to talk about it at #ooc-lang

shasta3• 16 years ago

You forgot "sexy"

cageface6• 16 years ago

I'm in language overload at this point. Much more than another language I'd like to see some creative new architectural approaches to problems that are thorny or tedious to solve right now.

I mean, if something as simple as applying MVC principles to web development can create a revolution there have to be a lot of other unplucked ideas out there. Software engineering feels a lot like architecture would if people spent 95% of their time talking about materials.

nddrylliog9• 16 years ago

A good language that is pleasant to write leads to more experimentation with approaches to a problem - which wouldn't get tried out otherwise because it would be too tedious/performance-intensive with other languages/implementations.

I have basically built ooc to make programming a lot less annoying for me (and others) to try new things with. The work is really starting to pay off and I thought I'd share it! It's not like anybody forces you to try it ;)

cageface6• 16 years ago

A new language means I have to start from scratch with all the boring crap that you have to write to make a language usable. Database drivers, http libraries, mail tools, command-line parsing utils, xml & json serialization, test tools etc etc.

There's nothing more annoying IMO than reinventing all those wheels one more time. I'm willing to play with the new JVM languages because I can get all that stuff for free but the advantages of one more sui generis language are going to have to be HUGE for me to even consider retooling all that junk.

stcredzero• 16 years ago

What would a car metaphor be like? Would it be like we're all driving early racing cars? Not everybody even has a seat, and some people are still sitting astride cars like on a saddle? (Yes, some early racing cars are driven like this.) Some people are still arguing the merits of a two-lever yoke over the wheel. Others are arguing about 3 versus 4 wheels. There are people who advocate steam engines.

The thing is, the development of the car got to focus on and nail the use case and user experience before it was able to really take off. Do we really think of end-to-end user experience of programmers? Smalltalk had some human factors thinking put into it, but I'm not sure this happens for new languages with enough applied human factors knowledge and expertise. (And the attention to that sort of detail didn't go quite far enough for Smalltalk either.)

Most programmers are the last people to do that sort of designing. In particular, I think most programmers are too familiar with programming. It's like someone asked a driver of one of those saddle-seated early racing cars to design a minivan.

cageface6• 16 years ago

I think if you want to make a car analogy then languages are more fundamental, like roads. And if languages are like roads then we haven't gotten to the point of really exploring the design space of cars because we're too busy deciding how many lanes roads should have, which side of the road we should drive on, what kind of paving material we should use, and how traffic signs should be posted.

To be competitive in the current web job market, I have to have at least three fundamentally very similar languages under my belt: javascript, and at least two of perl, php, python and ruby. In truth any one of these could easily do the job of the others. Lately I find this irksome. Diversity is only a virtue up to a certain point.

shasta3• 16 years ago

Languages and abstractions aren't really that different. Every time you define a new function, you're in some sense extending the language. In languages with powerful macro systems, this "language extension" is even more potent.

I agree with you that good abstractions (architectures are just large-scale abstractions) are needed, but that doesn't mean the new abstractions won't come in the form of a new language. In some sense, they always will. In the sense you mean, some abstractions fit better into existing languages than others.

technomancy• 16 years ago

> curl: bash -c "`curl -L http://ooc-lang.org/install.sh`

Extra points for this awesome install process. I wish more projects would make a seamless newbie experience higher-priority.

shasta3• 16 years ago

Main reflex: Some useful syntactic advances over Java, but where's the beef? I see generics exist at runtime - what else?

Also, is the type system known or believed to be sound? Are there casts?

gmaster14405• 16 years ago

There are casts, closures, and more. Feel free to join #ooc-lang on irc.freenode.net to have more informative discussions ;)

0bfusct3• 16 years ago

Not to crap on the parade or anything but new languages are a dime a dozen and most all offer the same exact paradigms rehashed over and over and over. What I want is a low level easy to verify OOP/chaining functional concurrent language based on term rewriting. Something needs to be done to allow easier proving of programs with a language that is designed for this. I'm working on one.

Ooc: new awesome language with site redesign, guide, and screencast

Related Stories