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

The Oberon+ Programming Language

oberon-lang.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–116 of 116 posts

Re: The Oberon+ Programming Language

#111

Post by sedatk »

chadcmulligan wrote: post #90
sedatk wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm actually okay with begin and end, but, writing a function's name twice on both the declaration and after the end statement sounds like a HUGE chore. If that's mandatory, it's immediately a mood killer for me about Oberon+.

The idea was you have all the methods on the object available in a small list, and (originally at least) it aided one pass compiling. Delphi continues this and in the IDE you can just go Ctrl-Shift-C in the definition and it will fill out all the method implementation boilerplate automatically, you can then ctrl-click between the implementation and definition. It is useful, say you're in a method body, you ctrl-click…

No I meant this:

    proc Something()
    begin
      ...
    end Something
not the interface/impl declarations. Which actually makes this worse.

Re: The Oberon+ Programming Language

#112

Post by Rochus »

pjmlp wrote: post #110
Rochus wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The original Active Oberon (Reali, 2004) didn't have generics; you probably mean the ETH Oberon (2019) Language Report draft by Felix Friedrich; I don't think it's implemented somewhere.

Naturally I mean the latest version. As for it being implemented, I was assuming that by now it already was, given that it is still being actively developed.

The language proposed by Friedrich is actually a different one than Active Oberon, even if the latter is mentioned as a basis.

I didn't find a compiler yet which implements the proposed templates; if you know one please post a link.

Re: The Oberon+ Programming Language

#113

Post by sedatk »

illiarian wrote: post #85
sedatk wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Four different loops I think that having four different loops is better than jumping through four different hoops for different loop styles.

You don't jump through different hoops in most languages [1]. In Oberons you jump through the hoops because only `loop` is allowed to have `exit`, for example. Which is a constraint for the sake of constraints. Repeat is a do/while, but it doesn't have while's elseif statement. Again, because reasons. And so on. Oberon is nothing but hoops instead of loops. [1] Go's decision to not include do/while is on par with Obe…

I wasn't trying to defend Oberon per se but separate goal-specific loop constructs. Yes, not having `exit` in other loop types sounds problematic.

Re: The Oberon+ Programming Language

#114

Post by chadcmulligan »

sedatk wrote: post #111
chadcmulligan wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea was you have all the methods on the object available in a small list, and (originally at least) it aided one pass compiling. Delphi continues this and in the IDE you can just go Ctrl-Shift-C in the definition and it will fill out all the method implementation boilerplate automatically, you can then ctrl-click between the implementation and definition. It is useful, say you're in a method body, you ctrl-click…

No I meant this: proc Something() begin ... end Something not the interface/impl declarations. Which actually makes this worse.

oh ok, yeah that's not pretty

Re: The Oberon+ Programming Language

#115

Post by cxr »

H4ZB7 wrote: post #96

looks like an absolutely uninteresting boomer language, by the fact that it just shows standard imperative stuff followed by "wow it supports unicode, we are up to date"! (which is a misfeature, btw, i like being able to audit my code before running it (not that thats possible in the current mess of misconceived computers but yeah still it would be good to start doing things in the right direction). its interesting t…

> oberon that actual uses the same language for the shell

This is a common misconception. Oberon's text-based user interface lets you invoke commands in the M.P form, but it doesn't really have a shell language—at least not in the familiar sense—and to the extent that something like one kind of exists, it certainly isn't the same as Oberon-the-language.

Re: The Oberon+ Programming Language

#116

Post by timbit42 »

imtringued wrote: post #93

Seeing pascal syntax for the first time, I was confused why it looks so overly verbose, like VHDL. It turns out that it was Pascal that rubbed off onto VHDL. However, this makes me think that pascal style syntax is a very poor choice for software development.

It's more readable than innumerable symbols like in C++ or Rust.
Post reply on HN