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

Eul – The language

eul.im

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 33 posts

Re: Eul – The language

#11

Post by heinrich5991 »

eridius wrote: post #7

Every single macOS download I've tried of Eul has been completely broken. It simply won't launch. Doing so from the Terminal gives the following output: dyld: Library not loaded: libnanovg.a Referenced from: /Applications/eul.app/Contents/MacOS/./eul Reason: image not found Weirdly, `otool -L eul` tells me that eul links against no dynamic libraries whatsoever (not even libSystem) and `otool -l eul` backs this up. I'…

You need to unpack it via upx first. Then you'll be able to see the shared library dependencies with `otool`.

Re: Eul – The language

#13

Post by zokier »

oconnor663 wrote: post #10

Normally I think "rewrite it in Rust!" comments are annoying, but in this case the author's requirements sound pretty relevant: - integration with C libraries - overhead similar to C - more productive than C - "Variables are immutable by default, globals are not allowed, functions are pure." That does sound an awful lot like Rust, at least if we kind of squint our eyes at the purity requirement :) I wonder if the ori…

On the other hand, Rust definitely does not have "Fast compilation", and although debatable, I would say that "Simplicity" is not one of Rusts many virtues.

Re: Eul – The language

#16

Post by JoshTriplett »

zokier wrote: post #13
oconnor663 wrote: post #10

Normally I think "rewrite it in Rust!" comments are annoying, but in this case the author's requirements sound pretty relevant: - integration with C libraries - overhead similar to C - more productive than C - "Variables are immutable by default, globals are not allowed, functions are pure." That does sound an awful lot like Rust, at least if we kind of squint our eyes at the purity requirement :) I wonder if the ori…

On the other hand, Rust definitely does not have "Fast compilation", and although debatable, I would say that "Simplicity" is not one of Rusts many virtues.

> On the other hand, Rust definitely does not have "Fast compilation",

True, though several people are now working on compiler performance.

> and although debatable, I would say that "Simplicity" is not one of Rusts many virtues.

I've found that Rust seems as simple as it can be given the problem it's solving. For instance, lifetimes and borrow checking aren't trivial, but I have a hard time thinking of a simpler abstraction that has the same safety and performance properties.

Another way to look at it: C is "simpler", in some ways, but it pushes the corresponding complexity into the heads of developers and the code of helper/wrapper libraries and tools.

Re: Eul – The language

#18

Post by dom96 »

oconnor663 wrote: post #10

Normally I think "rewrite it in Rust!" comments are annoying, but in this case the author's requirements sound pretty relevant: - integration with C libraries - overhead similar to C - more productive than C - "Variables are immutable by default, globals are not allowed, functions are pure." That does sound an awful lot like Rust, at least if we kind of squint our eyes at the purity requirement :) I wonder if the ori…

Since we're suggesting alternatives already I would like to throw Nim into the mix.

- Variables aren't immutable by default, but neither are they mutable by default.

- Globals are discouraged.

- Nim compiles to C so integration with C libraries is easy and overhead is also similar to C.

- Productivity is subjective but I'd say it's significantly more productive than C.

- Despite going through a C compiler the compilation is still incredibly fast.

Re: Eul – The language

#19

Post by AnIdiotOnTheNet »

dom96 wrote: post #18
oconnor663 wrote: post #10

Normally I think "rewrite it in Rust!" comments are annoying, but in this case the author's requirements sound pretty relevant: - integration with C libraries - overhead similar to C - more productive than C - "Variables are immutable by default, globals are not allowed, functions are pure." That does sound an awful lot like Rust, at least if we kind of squint our eyes at the purity requirement :) I wonder if the ori…

Since we're suggesting alternatives already I would like to throw Nim into the mix. - Variables aren't immutable by default, but neither are they mutable by default. - Globals are discouraged. - Nim compiles to C so integration with C libraries is easy and overhead is also similar to C. - Productivity is subjective but I'd say it's significantly more productive than C. - Despite going through a C compiler the compila…

If we're playing "recommend a language", I'll mention my personal favorite: Zig.

-`const` for declaring immutables, `var` for mutables, do what you want.

-Use globals if you want, or don't.

-Can directly import C headers, generally no need to write bindings.

-Personally I've found it significantly more productive

-Compiles fast, but lets be fair, people only bring this up because C++ and Rust are the outliers here by compiling so slowly.

Other noteworthy features:

-Standard library is completely optional.

-No default allocator.

-Comptime functionality instead of macros.

Post reply on HN