very funny,

how many info density will it lose?

This project sounds good.

What is it actually like?

I didn't understand anything at all.

you are my prophet. have every and all upvotes in the universe.

Laboratory leaks have occurred more than once.

Is it feasible to create a new language by adding features to C

just as was done with C++?

It's not worth it. The value of C is in compatibility, availability of compilers, and familiarity.

As soon as you change anything in a breaking way, start requiring your own compiler/transpiler, or introduce new idioms, you end up losing the things that keep C alive.

Users of C either like it exactly the way it is, or have to use a specific C version due to a vendor dependency or compliance.

An upgraded C not approved by the standards body gives you yet another niche language that is not C, but is still burdened with its old flaws.

Well said.

I really don't understand why people bring up other languages when one is discussing implementation of some "advanced/tricky/hackish/new" features in C. It is not as if the implementer does not know about the ease of availability in other languages but there is always some set of criteria which prevents switching to a new language.

On a related note, there is a dearth of written/learning material (books etc.) cataloging and explaining advanced architecture/design/implementation patterns in C though we know they exist in the tons of industrial-strength codebases out there.

There is also the fact that when you see an implementation in C of some feature from another language you better understand language design pragmatics eg. implementing inheritance and virtual functions in C gives you insight into how they work in C++/Java/C#/etc.

It would be nice to have something like C which was very much like C and Pascal (not the syntax) but which was basically C except no naked pointers by default etc, fewer footguns, but which would generate C.

And Objective-C, yet somehow people reinvent them badly in C.

I am working on a language that was C with extensions, transpiled to plain C, but the C syntax is kinda not great to work with (stuff like needing type tables and unbounded lookahead). At the point you clean up the syntax, you're not really C with extensions anymore.

C3 might be it because C3 has full C ABI compatibility so unlike most modern C-like alternatives, it checks out.

I mean you dont need to make a "language" at all, you can just write a librar for all the stuff you need. This stuff is just syntactic sugar.

For example, when I worked on writing embedded software for autopilots, we had 2 files, common.so and common.h that contained essentially a super robust typing framework. The way it worked is that you defined types through the provided functions at the beginning of your code, and all of the definitions were stored and checked at runtime at the beginning before the main execution loop took effect. So basically taking what a more robust language compiler would do and just moving that processing to the start of execution.

I use something similar for my local llm setup at home, where i can have my agent basically write tools for itself and when the tool fails, the error code makes it pretty easy for the agent to fix.

Congrats, you (re-)invented Objective-C!

Sure. After all, gcl and ecl compile to C source.

There are already plenty of such languages, Zig among others.

zig doesn't "extend" C in the way that C++ does.

But C++ does not extend C as well.

i guess i should say "the way that C++ _did_", although i do want to say "you know what i mean" since they do still share quite a bit

C3?

Nope, they went their own way now, see recent blog posts.

Some arguments are based on "past experience..."

However, such experiences are not absolute truths and cannot be equated with the current situation.

I think the big question is whether these recent gains continue. It’s entirely plausible that the ai firms are going to run out of human trainers capable of further refining the model. It’s also possible we are on the cusp of real superintelligence.

I’ve worked on something similar, but the code reconstructed from the Clang AST fails to compile due to various issues.

Can these issues be resolved?

If AI cannot reason, can humans?

I think the real question is: how do we define reasoning?

My view is that AI can reason, just differently from humans.

If life really exists there, it implies that life is everywhere in the universe.

That was absolutely terrifying.

It is likely that conditions for the appearance of life exist in many places in the universe, though probably not in every stellar system.

However, it is also likely that the places where living beings can evolve into something more complex than bacteria are only a very small fraction of those where life exists.

There are chances that life might exist on one or more of the satellites of Jupiter or Saturn, but it is pretty certain that it cannot be more complex than bacteria or at most protozoa, because on Earth the evolution of big multicellular living beings was conditioned by the development of the ability to extract energy from solar light.

Without solar light, the maximum rate of energy production is from methanogenesis, which would not sustain any big living being.

Solar light is too weak at that distance anyway, and life, if it exists, is burrowed at depths where the temperature is high enough, where any light is likely to be completely attenuated.

I find it fairly plausible that life exists anywhere the conditions are even slightly favorable. All you need is just enough time for some atoms to form a self-replicating configuration and that pretty much kick starts it.

It might not evolve into something very complex, though.

Not really, there has been a lot of crossover of organic-carrying meteors within our own solar system, it's pretty plausible that multiple bodies in our solar system have life from a single origin event, which doesn't say anything about the rest of the universe.

For tasks you don't want to do (such as work-related ones), use an LLM.

For tasks you enjoy, write them yourself.