Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!mailrus!uflorida!beach.cis.ufl.edu!seeger
From: seeger@beach.cis.ufl.edu (Charles Seeger)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: using (ugh!  yetch!) assembler
Summary: Higher Level Lang ==> C++
Message-ID: <16930@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU>
Date: 6 Aug 88 19:32:29 GMT
References: <11701@steinmetz.ge.com> <933@esunix.UUCP>
Sender: news@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU
Reply-To: seeger@beach.cis.ufl.edu (Charles Seeger)
Organization: UF EE Department
Lines: 21

In article <933@esunix.UUCP> sedwards@esunix.UUCP (Scott Edwards) writes:

>Now after that statement this is going to sound real strange, but I
>think that the problem with the current HLL's is that they are not
>high enough, I would like a HLL that knows about trees, linked lists,
>etc. and how to deal with them, so I don't have to code all of the
>normal operations (insert, delete, etc) on them every time I use one.

Sounds like a call for C++, or some equivalent language.  But, methinks,
C++ will be the one that gains ascendency.  True, it's as low level as C,
and it's really HIGH level stuff will be in libraries that don't exist yet,
but it's ability to allow code reuse via *multiple* inheritance (new in the
latest AT&T cfront release, 2.0) is very powerful.  Yet, the language is
still relatively small.  IMHO, it just needs exception handling (which
appears to be gaining some acceptance), parallel programming constructs
(perhaps as in Occam/CSP) and some optional tricks for SW Eng.

But, does this discussion belong in comp.arch?

Cheers
Chuck