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

The Bosque Programming Language

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 178 posts

Re: The Bosque Programming Language

#15

Post by shakna »

TylerE wrote: post #8
xixixao wrote: post #3

I gotta say you lost me at args->allof It’s 2020, if you’re really serious about building a new language, shouldn’t you at least pick a reasonable naming case convention? (allOf, AllOf, all_of, all-of would all work) (Not talking about the fact that allOf doesn’t seem very consistent with other languages...)

all-of should not work unless your syntax for basic arithmetic is something heinous.

Refusing to allow symbols in identifiers might make some things easier to read, but is annoying as hell if you're touching anything scientific.

If you have something clear you break tokens on, like whitespace (except within quotes), then you should have no problems allowing arbitrary symbols inside an identifier.

Re: The Bosque Programming Language

#16

Post by mrkmarron »

xixixao wrote: post #3

I gotta say you lost me at args->allof It’s 2020, if you’re really serious about building a new language, shouldn’t you at least pick a reasonable naming case convention? (allOf, AllOf, all_of, all-of would all work) (Not talking about the fact that allOf doesn’t seem very consistent with other languages...)

You are right, allof is inconsistent with the language naming conventions. I was updating some other collections support and made that fix as well. Thanks!

Re: The Bosque Programming Language

#17

Post by cygx »

munro wrote: post #9
TylerE wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

all-of should not work unless your syntax for basic arithmetic is something heinous.

Or you're Lisp

Or The Language Formerly Known as Perl6 [1], where it won't cause much friction as variable names ordinarily start with a sigil.

[1] https://docs.raku.org/syntax/identifiers#Ordinary_identifier...

Re: The Bosque Programming Language

#19

Post by sachinjoseph »

mrkmarron wrote: post #14

Hi, project owner here, great to see this on HN and always happy to hear from folks here and on the GitHub repo. We also have a webinar with Q&A scheduled for Thursday morning ( https://note.microsoft.com/MSR-Webinar-Programming-Languages... ) which may be of interest as well.

The use use of '=' here scares me:

   function add2(x: Int, y: Int): Int {
       return x + y;
   }
   
   add2(2, 3)     //5
   add2(x=2, y=3) //5
   add2(y=2, 5)   //7
The language already supports '=' operator for assignment of variables in the current scope, so should you use the same operator for denoting value assignment formal parameters in a function call? This can lead to a lot of confusion between variables in the scope and formal parameter names in a function that is called from the current scope.

Re: The Bosque Programming Language

#20

Post by wizeman »

> As a result of these design choices there is always a single unique and canonical result for any Bosque program. This means that developers will never see intermittent production failures or flaky unit-tests!

So Bosque programs are not allowed to receive input from the outside world?

> When an error occurs in deployed mode the runtime simply aborts, resets, and re-runs the execution in debug mode to compute the precise error!

Again, no interaction with the outside world? Or are all inputs recorded during the entire execution?

It doesn't seem like this could work as specified in many real-world scenarios...

EDIT:

> This compiles recursive functions into a CPS form that uses constant stack space, eliminating any possible Out-of-Stack issues

So recursion cannot depend on input from the outside world?

Either 1. I'm missing something, 2. Bosque programs indeed cannot receive input from the outside world, or 3. these claims seem a bit exaggerated...

Post reply on HN