121–130 of 387 posts
I'm not sure about the "learn it as a first language" bit. x:=(1|2); y:=(7|8); (x,y) This stuff just doesn't seem intuitive to me. It's not verbose enough to be obvious to someone who doesn't know what's going on. Looks interesting though; that's a really bright group of people. Be curious to see where their project ends up.
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/29451291/cartesian-produ...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it makes more sense if you don't think of it as an angle but a motivation. We've all been attacked with stuff like "shopping lists but on the blockchain!" for so long. This isn't like that. It's that they're foreseeing a technical problem of a shitload of concurrency and extra pain of API changes (metaverse) and this is meant to help.
I didn’t find the metaverse stuff to be a compelling motivation for the programming language features described. It felt to me more like ‘I had some ideas about programming languages after 20+ years of Haskell and research. Here’s my plan to unify logic programming with more normal functional programming (also we’re getting rid of monads). By the way my boss cares about the metaverse.’ But maybe that is too cynical.…
For what it's worth, Tim Sweeney (the "boss" in this story) has been thinking about Verse or something like it since at least 2006: https://www.st.cs.uni-saarland.de/edu/seminare/2005/advanced...
It seems much less like SPJ getting funding from a big-bucks metaverse boss, and much more like Tim Sweeney getting together a dream team to make his dream language in one form or another.
Off topic but wow cannot believe someone used comic sans.
Fun fact: Comic Sans is supposed to be easier to read for dyslexic people.
[0]: https://www.edutopia.org/article/do-dyslexia-fonts-actually-...
a good phrase on this link: "... dyslexia is a language-based processing difference, not a vision problem, despite the popular and enduring misconceptions."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you have some examples of things in here that you think will help you solve current problems? I'm approaching it from the angle that I don't see how functional programming is at all useful for the kind of gameplay programming that would be done in a "metaverse" or is done in Unreal Engine today. So "it can do functional programming stuff" by itself doesn't cause any excitement. Rather the opposite. There are zero…
The approach of using a function to describe a type where success is the identity is a very simple way to implement dependant types
This looks like Erlang for game design. I’ve done some game programming software and a large number of their decisions make sense in that environment. In particular, expression evaluation and a lack of booleans.
I have no experience with game programming. Why would you not want booleans when developing games?
The choice stuff might make vector and GPU programming more natural, assuming it can be made efficient enough. The syntax it provides is certainly convenient for that. Might even be an advance over array programming in some ways, by being more flexible and opening up more forms of expression. Has this been considered?
In what respect is it an advance? It seems to me strictly less expressive. (Which is not meant as a denigration; this design seems well suited to the problems it is trying to solve.)
I dunno about slide 39 - where calling f(x) may or may not give x a value. From a code readability standpoint, a reader of the codebase needs to be wary of every function. I see the issue is that iff you explicitly marked it as inout, it would limit the code from a logic unification point of view. I guess this is already explored in prolog, which I have little experience with - but it feels like it would inherently l…
The distinction between bringing variables into scope and assigning them values is a strange one for a functional language, but in fairness the talk is titled beyond functional programming.
Every time someone gives a programming language a name that needs disambiguation terms for a decent google search, a puppy dies.
How does x:=(y|2); y:=(7|8); (x|y) Give only (7,7), (8,8), (2,7), (2,8)?
What about (7,8) or (8,7)?