On Jan 29, 2008, at 5:46 PM, Christopher Wyatt wrote: > Thinking "out loud" here. > > Editing the language reference for the Wiki, I am wondering about > some of the keywords and language conventions. Sometimes, things > just simply seem "weird" to me. I can't quite explain it. For > example, if the language is now only for OS X, The language is only for OS X when compiling via FBtoC. Otherwise, it is still possible to compile for OS 8/9. The vision for Editor integration would allow the programmer to compile with either the FB compiler or the FBtoC translator. > > Is there going to be a chance to revise the language at all? If you > want non-FB users (like myself) to migrate from other tools, some > of the syntax could be updated. Old syntax could be converted, > after a time. Since everything is getting converted to C at some > point, it isn't quite as bad as updating a hand-tuned compiler. Good points. The reference manual does need an overhaul to reflect what FBtoC does/does not support. A combination reference manual would undoubtedly be helpful on many levels. > > Just trying to think through how to appeal to those of us living > with VB and RB, but pondering other tools. Many of the FBers (and now C users thanks to FBtoC) are folks who prefer a powerful procedural language instead of O-O languages like RB and Objective C. At least for me that is the major appeal. RB code does not impress me as elegant, efficient and concise like FB and C can be if written well. If not for the cross-platform feature I wouldn't consider RB at all. Brian S.