Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: creating a text adventure, but with what programming language?  (Read 16627 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ejstans

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2009
  • Posts: 48
    • Show all replies
Quote from: Karlos;603988
No, just thinking pragmatically.

All the implementations I saw turn your Obj-J into regular javascript. Hence there's nothing it can actually do that can't be done in JS directly. Probably with a greater degree of efficiency too.
But Karlos, any Turing complete language can express another language. The original C++ compiler compiled into C code and yet it brought something new to the table, no? Hrm, right, there are plenty of C coders who disagree with that ("C can do OO just swell thank you, but OO is shite anyways")

Well then, let's try a different example! In the end, compiled languages usually come out in the form of cryptic assembly code, and certainly everyone can agree that being able to write in a high-level language is a welcome improvm....Oh right...This is the Amiga forum wherein this very thread there is talk of writing a text adventure in assembly...

Hmmm, what was my point again? :lol:
"It is preferable not to travel with a dead machine."

A500 1.3 / 512KiB slowmem / GVP HD8 w/ 8MiB fastmem & 52MB HDD
A600 2.05 / 1GB SSD
A1200 3.0 / Blizzard 1200/4 w/ 68882 @ 33MHz / 1GB SSD
A1200T 3.0 / Apollo 1260 w/ 68EC060 @ 50MHz & 16 MiB fastmem / 4GB SSD
 

Offline ejstans

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2009
  • Posts: 48
    • Show all replies
Re: creating a text adventure, but with what programming language?
« Reply #1 on: January 05, 2011, 12:16:09 PM »
Quote from: Karlos;603998
Expressing C++ generics in C, without some hideous macro orgy (let's not forget, the preprocessor is not actually C) might test that theory in practise.
Comeau, arguably the most standard-compliant C++ compiler (even supports the hideous export keyword), carries on the tradition of Stroustrup's original and compiles into C rather than assembly, so the theory has definitely been tested in practice already :) But I don't see why you'd need macros to compile C++ generics into C? By the way, the preprocessor is (however unfortunate) very much part of C/C++. Though wouldn't I love if it were deprecated and a proper module system put in place instead...
"It is preferable not to travel with a dead machine."

A500 1.3 / 512KiB slowmem / GVP HD8 w/ 8MiB fastmem & 52MB HDD
A600 2.05 / 1GB SSD
A1200 3.0 / Blizzard 1200/4 w/ 68882 @ 33MHz / 1GB SSD
A1200T 3.0 / Apollo 1260 w/ 68EC060 @ 50MHz & 16 MiB fastmem / 4GB SSD