I write compilers that (using PRG commands) read the new language's code, parse it, and generate legal SB code. The new language can be just a syntax change (like SBSP) or be an entirely different paradigm (like N#).

I respect people like you. Those who know the limitations but push them anyway. That's how progress is made in the world.

I hate to be this guy, but C will be extremely hard to compile to SB. C has so much stuff that SB doesn't, you'd likely have to compile to some sort of bytecode and run that. I can't wait to see the result, but remember the environment you're working in. This is why Minecraft is still impossible for SB (ignoring copyright).

Now that N# is pretty much done, I'm making my new language: H#. Its main influencers will be F# and Haskell. It will be a functional, declarative language. I'm still in the design phase though. How does this example look as far as syntax? Appealing? Repulsive? Clear? Obfuscated?

Okay, syntax improvements to the 'switch' block.

Yes, I do know that speed is important since I made MCDS and had to deal with all of the angry 'lol ur gam iz not fest enuf' comments. I'm just saying that it's not all you should look for in a language.

N# does a huge deal of simplication during the compilation process. For example, private functions are added by the compiler not recognizing the function name outside that particular class. Becaude of this, private functions add no speed decreases in the output. Also, you seem to put speed of a language above everything else. I'd like to remind you that other factors (like design) matter also.

The key, description, instructions, etc. are all located over at smilebasicsource.com

N#'s strength is not in speed, but rather in its ability to implement the OOP paradigm into SmileBasic. Also, N# is available for download.

I have no comment.

Etwas is correct. The N# code is parsed once, and the compiler generates a separate PRG file that can be run and published completely independently of any N# supporter files.

Also, the newest N# version uses full AOT compilation to SB. So runtime parsing is nonexistant.

That is where you are incorrect. The N# compiler compiles its code into SB, which means that code can theoretically run equally fast. Plus, with 'VAR,' it was replaced by 3 keywords: string, int, and float. These types work the same as the SB equivalents. Plus, I don't know where you learned Java was a good language. C#.NET is so much better (I've used both).

Well, for one, it's uncommented. Secondly, it works on a different paradigm than SB, meaning code should be thought out and structured differently. Thirdly, it's much better than, say, C or Haskell.

N# is working amazingly well for my Arcade program! It's doing exactly my intention: Object-Oriented programming with better syntax and more features than SmileBasic.

None yet.

Aw, man! Almost had it... :/

I've realized I'm terrible at Stacker...

As my first major project in N#, I'm making an arcade program! The game "Stacker" is almost complete. Made completely in N#.

N# is looking great! I'm very impressed with how it's turned out. Just a few last things to add!