Programming

17313 readers

386 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Follow the programming.dev instance rules
Keep content related to programming in some way
If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities [email protected]

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Recommend me a programming language (self.programming)

submitted 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) by pathief to c/[email protected]

171 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I've been working with a Javascript (+ TypeScript) + Java + SQL stack for the last 10 years.

For 2024 I'd like to learn a new programming language, just for fun. I don't have any particular goals in mind, I just want to learn something new. If I can use it later professionally that'd be cool, but if not that's okay too.

Requirements:

Runs on linux
Not interested in languages created by Google or Apple
No "joke languages", please

Thank you very much!

EDIT: I ended up ordering the paperback version of the Rust book. Maybe one day I'll contribute to the Lemmy code base or something :P Thank you all for the replies!!!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

That’s true, but if the transformations have more than one argument, they go after the name

Yup, I understand. That's why I've not put them in the concatenative section.

Also, there are more languages with this feature, for example D, VimScript or Koka.

Thanks, maybe I'll add them to the sidebar! I hadn't heard of Koka.

If you have a suggested heading/description to replace "partially concatenative" I'm interested. Function chaining? And I'm not sure but maybe execline is actually concatenative and needs to be moved out of that section.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

I think “uniform function call syntax” is the established term for this particular feature.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Thanks. I know that's the case for Nim's flexibility, but I didn't think it applied to the pipe operator stuff like in Roc. I'll do some reading tonight to confirm.