Show HN: “Crafting Interpreters” chapter, control flow and Turing-completeness • Hacker News Board

Re: Show HN: “Crafting Interpreters” chapter, control flow and Turing-completeness

#41

Post by agumonkey » Tue, Jun 27, 2017, 5:50 PM UTC

DonaldPShimoda wrote: post #40

agumonkey wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The colored sets ?

I think you mean Flatt's "Binding as Sets of Scopes" [1]. Yeah, that's definitely something he's working on. There are a couple PhD candidates in his group who are also working on macros and hygiene, but I don't follow their research directly (we're just often in the same room so I hear about it). [1] http://www.cs.utah.edu/plt/publications/popl16-f.pdf

Cool, from what I recall Flatt said there were issues in his process so I'm curious about what's new.

Re: Show HN: “Crafting Interpreters” chapter, control flow and Turing-completeness

#42

Post by dang » Tue, Jun 27, 2017, 6:52 PM UTC

munificent wrote: post #13

dang wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it's different. A book (assuming it's a real book and not something slapdash) is a major piece of work. Obviously some of the finer distinctions (e.g. what counts as a book chapter vs. an article) can get pretty arbitrary. But the broader lines aren't. The intent of Show HN is for people to share what they're working on. If we applied the strictest definition, the only thing anyone could easily 'try out' would b…

> A book (assuming it's a real book and not something slapdash) is a major piece of work. It is, I hope. But if you're prefer I post these without "Show HN", I'm happy to. I thought it was worth doing it to make it more obvious that I was self-posting, but I can not do that if that's what others would prefer.

It's fine. We always intended books to count as valid Show HNs.

Re: Show HN: “Crafting Interpreters” chapter, control flow and Turing-completeness

#43

Post by munificent » Tue, Jun 27, 2017, 7:38 PM UTC

ejanus wrote: post #39

Some typos : cook it down to a small number of primitives that the "back end" can do its magic on. backend . Most other syntax trees always evaluate their subtress. subtrees . Good read, thanks for sharing.

Thank you! I'll upload a fix for "subtress" when I get a chance. I believe "back end" as two words is still the most common formulation:

https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=backend%2Cback...

Re: Show HN: “Crafting Interpreters” chapter, control flow and Turing-completeness

#44

Post by DonaldPShimoda » Tue, Jun 27, 2017, 9:08 PM UTC

agumonkey wrote: post #41

DonaldPShimoda wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you mean Flatt's "Binding as Sets of Scopes" [1]. Yeah, that's definitely something he's working on. There are a couple PhD candidates in his group who are also working on macros and hygiene, but I don't follow their research directly (we're just often in the same room so I hear about it). [1] http://www.cs.utah.edu/plt/publications/popl16-f.pdf

Cool, from what I recall Flatt said there were issues in his process so I'm curious about what's new.

Ah, I wish I could tell you! He's recently taken on some more teaching duties, so I dunno to what extent that is impacting his research abilities. (Hopefully not too much!)