You mean a interpretative language with similar role to Python, but more like Rust/C++ style? I actually want that so that I can ditch Python even if I learned it and use this instead.
I kind of like it. I can understand where it start and end.
I only stick with these:
- pull
- add
- commit
- push
Easy.
For raster graphics image processing, I'd highly recommend G'MIC. Otherwise, Python and especially for string using regex library. I wish there was a vector graphics version of G'MIC.
Every languages has their own pitfalls. The answer on picking a language is to pick whatever works for you. There may be even domain-specific languages if you're interested in a domain, and it can be way more flexible than general-purpose solutions for that domain too.
I use 4 languages.
- C++ for adding features to a program.
- C# for making .dll for an application (
Paint.NET
). Kinda similar purpose to what I do with G'MIC, except so much more limited. - Python for processing strings
- G'MIC for creating/editing raster graphics images (volumetric too)
Now, I wish there was a vector equivalent to G'MIC, but there isn't.
Also, highlighted the way you expect when you click next to braces works too.
From some one who used Python as it was the easiest solution to few of my problems, and having to experience languages with brackets and/or endif/fi/done as ways to limit scope, I find that having things like brackets and/or scope terminators easier to parse and less error-prone. I'm thinking about moving on to Ruby whenever I had a need where Python would be a good choice, but the time it takes for me to understand a new language is blocking me from that.
My crazy take is that there needs to be a interpretative language alternative to Python which uses brackets to define scope and/or things like elif/else/fi/endif/done. Much easier that way in my opinion, and the ";" shouldn't be necessary. I'm used to Python, but if I had another language which can be used to serve similar purpose to Python with those features, I would never code in Python again when it comes up.
Having to code in Julia and G'MIC (Domain-Specific Interpretative language that is arguably the most flexible for raster graphics content creation and editing), they're the closest to there, but they're more suitable for their respective domain than generic ones.
Hmm, I think I will give it a star in case I need something like this. I did use regex enough to know how it works though I do have a offline regex101 software to aid into that.
Cython is a better equilavent as it does compile to C while enabling Python syntax. No one is arguing C or C++ is the best language. I'd even argue a perfect language does not exist. Simple syntax could be argued on a line to line basis, but forced indents is uncomfortable for some, and Julia could be argued to be better in that area. I'm one to hope Julia can take off.
In my opinion, it depends on your goals and scope. If memory manipulation (Probably not the correct words), and/or every bit of performance matters, or it has a large scope, then one would pick Rust/C-lang. If development time and scope is small, something like Python is better.
Source: I used C++, C#, Python, and I use G'MIC (language very much geared for raster graphics processing).
Coming from some one who used 4 different languages (C#, C++, Python, and G'MIC), I just feel more comfortable when there's a explicit end blocks, which is why I don't like Python. Of all of those languages, only Python does not make that explicit end block which is off-putting in my opinion, and there isn't any other options with the similar role to Python.