- each variable can either be masculine or feminine.
- masculine arrays are one-based, feminine arrays are zero-based (this is soooo obvious).
- In a jagged array, at least 40% of the subarrays need to be feminine.
- If you construct a date by concatenating a masculine and a feminine variable, some of the space allocated for the masculine variable will be reallocated for the date.
- Every 28th cpu cycle, all feminine variables will throw exceptions or other heavy objects if queried the wrong way (what the right and wrong way is, is undocumented – pending research)
- During communication, feminine variables will always go through a named pipe, tcp port or anything like that before masculine.
- If a masculine pointer raises a flag for the wrong feminine variable, it is not an exception.
- A female binary large object will be tried but not caught.
- Feminine variables will never dump unless they are grouped.
- Feminine variables are not static with threads, they change patterns every season.
- Behind every long masculine integer there is a feminine char.
- To construct a short, you must first concatenate a feminine single and a masculine single into a mixed gender double, the most significant bits of the double will then overflow into a short after a period of 9×30 cycles. The double can spawn several shorts before they are either deallocated or split into two singles again.
- Feminine variables should be camelcase.
- Masculine variables have their own opinion on what the most significant bits of feminine variables are.
guge has written 3 entries about this goal
Here are some more ideas for my satirical programming language.
- “this” is of course a keyword. So is “that”, “other”, “nothing” and “something”.
- value neutrality. Sometimes 4 < 5, sometimes they are just as good. Who am I to tell?
- if …. then …. else …. why not …. otherwise …. or else …
- try … catch … fumble … drop … finally … or else …
- subject oriented
- type inference, scope inference, event inference, flow control inference
- complex nesting, flow control has a real part and an imaginary part
- interlocking brackets, such as ( .... [ .... ) .... ]
I want to create a programming language that consists of all the worst properties of real programming languages I have used, heard about, invented in nightmares.
Such as:- goto
- come from
- global scope
- all numeric constants are roman numerals
- numbers handled as strings
- switch being the only flow control
- max length for variable names should be one
- array not being zero or one based, but both
- fuzzyness, with keywords like “almost”, “sometimes”
- surprising use of operators
