Re: Constructed Computer Architectures (Concomps?)

Garth W. Wallace wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Feb 2009 08:51:16 -0500, <deinx nxtxr> <deinx.nxtxr@...>
> wrote:
>
>
>> Back when I first got into computing (~30 years ago) I did toy with ideas
>> for my own programming languages.  At some point I found the reserved word
>> table for Apple BASIC and relexed it to be a closer match for other BASIC's
>> of the day. I still have my idea for my own high-level language based mainly
>> on C or C++, which moving through the alphabet, and coincidentally landing
>> on my first initial would be called "D".
>>
>
> I once came up with my own C++-like partly object oriented procedural
> language. I named it T, because it was derived from C and wasn't Java. ;)
>
> I'm still rather proud of it, actually. It had some nifty features, like
> explicit polymorphism, true multidimensional arrays, overloading functions
> by type context, classification after-the-fact, daisy-chaining loops, and
> language support for multithreading (actually, "T" was originally short for
> "threaded", but I liked the pun).
>
My idea is something along the lines of not just *a* language but a
related set of languages which share, as much as possible, the same
structures and syntax.  By related languages, I mean there would be a
compiled language, an interpreted version for scripting or macros, a
fully interactive shell, and possibly even a database query language.