Readit NewsTogether they have higher pain killung effects than each alone, and the side effects are reduced as they affect different body parts. And the vitamin C reduces the damage to the stomach lining.
However I would point out that before Unity took off, jMonkeyEngine had a good following.
And since reference counting is also garbage collection from CS point of view, I would add Swift with the game development kits, however that is pretty much Apple only, thus not really the same league.
Microsoft unfortunately since XNA, the whole DirectX team has been anti .NET, they didn't even provided Windows Runtime Components for .NET Native, even though it would have been relatively easy to do so, as it is based on COM (plus some extras).
The moment key people responsible for XNA left the building, it was done.
I'd be ecstatic if there were something checking those boxes that wasn't owned by Microsoft.
In this manuscript for example you can see that power superscripts are really just regular numbers typed at an offset (perhaps rotating the paper around the platen one notch instead of the two that would be a whole line feed). But what about the vectors and the giant sigma? All hand drawn over the top of a typed manuscript?
Not the best example since 2*2=4 also.
How about this bit of Haskell:
f :: Bool -> Maybe Bool
f False = Nothing
f False = Just True
f False = Just False
f True = Nothing
f True = Just True
f True = Just False
EDIT: Nevermind, I counted wrong. Here are the 9:
f x = case x of
True -> Nothing
False -> Nothing
f x = case x of
True -> Nothing
False -> Just False
f x = case x of
True -> Nothing
False -> Just True
f x = case x of
True -> Just False
False -> Nothing
f x = case x of
True -> Just False
False -> Just False
f x = case x of
True -> Just False
False -> Just True
f x = case x of
True -> Just True
False -> Nothing
f x = case x of
True -> Just True
False -> Just False
f x = case x of
True -> Just True
False -> Just Truef1 False = Nothing, f1 True = Nothing
f2 False = Nothing, f2 True = Just True
...
This gives the correct 3^2 = 9 functions.
Nevertheless, I have fond memories of OCaml and a great amount of respect for the language design. Haven't checked on it since, probably should. I hope part of the problems have been solved.
As a new language design feature procedures could be assigned to references for reuse in the same way as calling a function by name/variable.