Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Alumina Programming Language

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 90 posts

Re: Show HN: Alumina Programming Language

#21

Post by tibordp »

noncoml wrote: post #17

I really don’t like the cognitive load of having to remember to use defer. We already have the scope defined, why add something extra? IMHO the way it’s used in Go is a workaround, of luck of destructors, not a feature. Edit: not a criticism on your language OP, which is better than what I could have ever built. Just a comment in the “defer” trend.

Scoped destruction is awesome in general, and I agree that it is superior to defer.

I think one case where defer might be nicer is for things that are not strictly memory, e.g. inserting some element into a container and removing it after the function finishes (or setting a flag and restoring it).

This can be done with a guard object in RAII languages, but it's a bit unintuitive. Defer makes it very clear what is going on.

Re: Show HN: Alumina Programming Language

#22

Post by culi »

MontyCarloHall wrote: post #3

I get that this is mostly for fun, but this is as good a place as any to bring up an issue I rarely see discussed with any post about a new language. Well-established languages have tons of widely used, highly vetted libraries implementing functionality that doesn’t exist in the new language and would be totally impractical for an individual to implement themselves. For example, if I’m doing scientific computing, I n…

What's an example of a language with "good" FFI?

Re: Show HN: Alumina Programming Language

#23

Post by jimbob45 »

mhd wrote: post #12

I thought people got along with Rust due to its features and semantics and learned to live with the syntax. Not it being something one would copy. (I'm personally still hoping for a Ratfor/Coffeescript transpiler) Also, wonder how long it'll take until we see a "Aluminia" fork...

What is it that people hate about Rust syntax beyond the terrible lifetime syntax? Seems pretty reasonable to me.

Re: Show HN: Alumina Programming Language

#24

Post by davedx »

culi wrote: post #22
MontyCarloHall wrote: post #3

I get that this is mostly for fun, but this is as good a place as any to bring up an issue I rarely see discussed with any post about a new language. Well-established languages have tons of widely used, highly vetted libraries implementing functionality that doesn’t exist in the new language and would be totally impractical for an individual to implement themselves. For example, if I’m doing scientific computing, I n…

What's an example of a language with "good" FFI?

Rust's seems pretty good. I've been doing some Rust/C interop and it works very smoothly

Re: Show HN: Alumina Programming Language

#25

Post by aaaaaaaaaaab »

jimbob45 wrote: post #23
mhd wrote: post #12

I thought people got along with Rust due to its features and semantics and learned to live with the syntax. Not it being something one would copy. (I'm personally still hoping for a Ratfor/Coffeescript transpiler) Also, wonder how long it'll take until we see a "Aluminia" fork...

What is it that people hate about Rust syntax beyond the terrible lifetime syntax? Seems pretty reasonable to me.

The community.

Re: Show HN: Alumina Programming Language

#26

Post by zyx_tony »

culi wrote: post #22
MontyCarloHall wrote: post #3

I get that this is mostly for fun, but this is as good a place as any to bring up an issue I rarely see discussed with any post about a new language. Well-established languages have tons of widely used, highly vetted libraries implementing functionality that doesn’t exist in the new language and would be totally impractical for an individual to implement themselves. For example, if I’m doing scientific computing, I n…

What's an example of a language with "good" FFI?

Nim is quite enjoyable to use. I do a decent amount of scientific computing, interfacing with various c/cpp libs

Re: Show HN: Alumina Programming Language

#28

Post by williamstein »

culi wrote: post #22
MontyCarloHall wrote: post #3

I get that this is mostly for fun, but this is as good a place as any to bring up an issue I rarely see discussed with any post about a new language. Well-established languages have tons of widely used, highly vetted libraries implementing functionality that doesn’t exist in the new language and would be totally impractical for an individual to implement themselves. For example, if I’m doing scientific computing, I n…

What's an example of a language with "good" FFI?

Calling C functions from zig is very nice, partly because zig uses llvm to parse C header files and uses that information.

Re: Show HN: Alumina Programming Language

#29

Post by beagle3 »

culi wrote: post #22
MontyCarloHall wrote: post #3

I get that this is mostly for fun, but this is as good a place as any to bring up an issue I rarely see discussed with any post about a new language. Well-established languages have tons of widely used, highly vetted libraries implementing functionality that doesn’t exist in the new language and would be totally impractical for an individual to implement themselves. For example, if I’m doing scientific computing, I n…

What's an example of a language with "good" FFI?

LuaJIT has a pretty great FFi which was later ported to standard Lua; Python’s ctypes provides a decent FFI.

Nim, Zig and Rust do too, but they have semantics much closer to C, so it’s almost free (especially when they can all use llvm directly for code generation, and Nim’s preferred way is to compile through C in the first place)

Re: Show HN: Alumina Programming Language

#30

Post by dhosek »

aaaaaaaaaaab wrote: post #25
jimbob45 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is it that people hate about Rust syntax beyond the terrible lifetime syntax? Seems pretty reasonable to me.

The community.

What I’ve found is that Rust people on stackoverflow not so great, Rust people on Reddit pretty pretty good.
Post reply on HN