[MUD-Dev] Programming Languages.

[Roy Trubshaw]

On 03 July 2003 04:47 J C Lawrence wrote:

> In the commercial world the answer is largely a resounding, "Yes!"
> There are exceptions, but they tend to be either small, or to be
> well constrained within a larger C++ structure.

We used VAX Pascal for Mud2. You wouldn't believe the variant record
that Richard came up with to emulate a void * 8-) ! - (that's
exclamation point _not_ bang)

> In the hobbyist world its a bit of a mash.  Historically C
> dominated with a fairly wide range of soft-code systems (in terms
> of language design).  More recent efforts have started to use
> other base languages: Perl, Python, Erlang, TOM, Java, C++, OCaML,
> etc.  My impression (utterly unsupported by statistics) is that
> there is not a clear language leader for from-scratch hobbyist
> systems (legacy derivatives have an obvious tendency to derive
> from their ancestor's choices).

Obviously there's no question but BCPL is the _only_ choice!! 8-)

[Snipped]

Toodle pip,
Roy Trubshaw
--
"You haven't lived 'til you've died in MUD." Some marketing guy from
BT New Information Services (whose name I have forgotten): MUD
Marketing Slogan 1985
_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev