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

151–160 of 178 posts

Re: The Bosque Programming Language

#151

Post by dunk010 »

rossng wrote: post #42

The language doesn't seem like the interesting part here. Bosque appears mainly to be a vehicle for exploring a different way of thinking about compiler IR. From the MSR site[1]: > In the Bosque project we ask the question of what happens if the IR is designed explicitly to support the rich needs of automated code reasoning, IDE tooling, etc. With this novel IR first perspective we are exploring a new way to think ab…

I know that Microsoft are all about grabbing as much developer mindshare as possible these days, but does nobody remember Steve Yegge and is Grok system at Google? It's basically this, just ten years ago. Having the IR not throw away anything so that the tooling can have a richer interaction. I guess the best way to be successful is to bury your sources.

Re: The Bosque Programming Language

#152

Post by mrkmarron »

tluyben2 wrote: post #45

How does the verification work? I see the Z3 prover in there; is there more detail on how that works with this language?

The design of the language is done in a manner that allows us to translate the code (and all conditions) into very friendly SMTLib code -- that we don't need to add a lot of additional checks like frame rules or havocs and where the set of theories (and their combinations) are well behaved.

We have some info on this in the research papers section and documents but are planning on a full paper focused on how this is done (particularly in the presence of union types, dynamic records/tuples, etc.)

Re: The Bosque Programming Language

#154

Post by nnoitra »

This is laughable - pretty much a buzzword soup.

Whenever I see "this language/tool does A and B well", it turns out it can neither do A nor B well enough.

>The Bosque programming language is a breakthrough research project from Microsoft Research.

Breakthrough according to who?

Re: The Bosque Programming Language

#155

Post by a1369209993 »

junker123 wrote: post #150
a1369209993 wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not that you don't have a point in general, but the snark and meanness in this HN thread is totally called for. > github.com/ microsoft /BosqueLanguage We may not know where the fishhook (or razor blade) is , but after fourty years of experience, we know there is one.

Yeah, the good ol' MIT-license fishhook.

That's a bit vague; do you mean MIT-licence-then-patent-troll, or MIT-licence-then-charge-for-security-updates, or MIT-licence-then-lots-of-'optional'-extras, or ...?

Re: The Bosque Programming Language

#156

Post by mpoteat »

m0llusk wrote: post #49
mpoteat wrote: post #2

This is pretty cool. This project has a long way to go before it's mature, but as someone who uses Typescript every day professionally, the promise of the ease and safety of Typescript coupled with the speed of C++ is really compelling.

The core ideas are kind of interesting, but in my experience where cool new language ideas come apart at the seams is when they are built out to completeness with libraries, packaging, configuration management and the rest. > ... The current focus of the Bosque project is core language design. As a result there is no support for packaging, deployment, lifecycle management, etc. ... So there is nothing solid there yet…

Oh yeah, I completely agree. To a certain extent it's best to be risk averse with things like this, especially when working on professional problems.

npm has spoiled me, so I doubt I'll ever try to use a language in anything other than a hobby capacity without a very good package manager and corresponding community of functionality.

Re: The Bosque Programming Language

#157

Post by megameter »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #130
benibela wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... and Pascal ! Many languages are superior to C/C++ C/C++ just wins from the amount of available libraries and high-quality implementations.

Maybe I'm too much of a pragmatist, but to me, the amount of available libraries and the quality of the implementations is part of what "superior" means. You may think that Pascal is superior on paper (that is, just the language specification). If we were programming on paper, that might matter. But we aren't.

It's very task-dependent.

If your needs are towards "indie software" that needs a snappy native UI and can make use of subprocesses to cover major dependencies, the Pascal options are really good and time-tested. It's probably underused for games in particular, in fact. Fast iteration times for game projects are a great selling point for contemporary use of Pascal, if you can justify the investment in engine code.

If you are writing server backends, there is nothing interesting going on in Pascal and you will be scraping around to find the bindings to do what you need. Likewise with a number of other common industry tasks.

Re: The Bosque Programming Language

#158

Post by sterlind »

dunk010 wrote: post #151
rossng wrote: post #42

The language doesn't seem like the interesting part here. Bosque appears mainly to be a vehicle for exploring a different way of thinking about compiler IR. From the MSR site[1]: > In the Bosque project we ask the question of what happens if the IR is designed explicitly to support the rich needs of automated code reasoning, IDE tooling, etc. With this novel IR first perspective we are exploring a new way to think ab…

I know that Microsoft are all about grabbing as much developer mindshare as possible these days, but does nobody remember Steve Yegge and is Grok system at Google? It's basically this, just ten years ago. Having the IR not throw away anything so that the tooling can have a richer interaction. I guess the best way to be successful is to bury your sources.

Grok seems to have been open-sourced as Kythe, and I suspect it was significantly nerfed like other things they've released (e.g. bazel)

Additionally, it looks like Kythe was never fully stabilized, and there's been no widespread usage of it. It's shovelware.

I don't think you should blame MS for not citing an internal tool that they never properly released.

Re: The Bosque Programming Language

#159

Post by sterlind »

a1369209993 wrote: post #155
junker123 wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the good ol' MIT-license fishhook.

That's a bit vague; do you mean MIT-licence-then-patent-troll, or MIT-licence-then-charge-for-security-updates, or MIT-licence-then-lots-of-'optional'-extras, or ...?

I think they were being sarcastic, pointing out that MIT licenses make poor fish-hooks. TypeScript wasn't fish-hooked, why would this be?

Re: The Bosque Programming Language

#160

Post by TomMarius »

throwaway_pdp09 wrote: post #128
steveklabnik wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Then tell us this. In fact stick it somewhere obvious. The first sentence of this page: > The Bosque programming language is a breakthrough research project from Microsoft Research. "Microsoft Research" is in italics, even.

And I quoted exactly that line. In my first post.

Why are you asking unrelated questions then? The goal is not to motivate you to use it, especially not you who seem to be uninterested in both the goals and the ways the team has proposed. On the other hand I like the direction - but I am not going to use it on a daily basis either, maybe in a few years.
Post reply on HN