Interpreted language(s) in the base

[Andrew Reilly]

On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 06:40:37PM +0200, Ivan Voras wrote:
> Will have to disagree on that - part of the point of having such a
> thing would be to attract young developers, and while the CS crowd
> will be happy with LISP, anyone starting programming after the first
> .com bubble will probably be repulsed by non-Algol-like syntaxes.

I suspect that you're right, though that disappoints me
somewhat.  The only other language that I'm aware of that does a
reasonable compiles-to-C and has an algol-like syntax is Eiffel
(specifically SmartEiffel), but I haven't used it for years,
and don't know how it's travelling.  It's also nowhere near as
dynamic and "fun" a programming experience, IMO.

Cheers,

-- 
Andrew