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

Buzz: A lightweight statically typed scripting language

buzz-lang.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 91 posts

Re: Buzz: A lightweight statically typed scripting language

#21

Post by pkulak »

hannofcart wrote: post #13
lelanthran wrote: post #12

> Objects, list and maps variables are only reference to them. Meaning you can't assign a new list to a constant variable but you can modify the list itself. In what contexts is this useful? I know it matches some other languages view of `constant`, but I feel that this sort of behaviour is very surprising to a user. Assuming the following code: object Person { str name = "Joe", | Fields can have default values int a…

I guess this works like the Javascript `const` keyword.

Java too. Rust is the only language I’ve used where “immutable” means everything through the whole reference tree is also immutable. Well, only language that allows mutation at all.

Re: Buzz: A lightweight statically typed scripting language

#22

Post by djur »

benrutter wrote: post #19

This comment section is very "why write a Language?" oriented. I love reading about new languages!! I work with data scientists a lot so I'll probably always use Python professionally, at least for the foreseeable future. But Python, JavaScript etc are huge languages with massive histories of practical trade offs and compromises. It's always exciting to see what someone's dream language looks like! Besides, learning…

I would hope that if someone designs their dream language they can explain what excites them about it. I'd love to read that.

Re: Buzz: A lightweight statically typed scripting language

#23

Post by IshKebab »

pkulak wrote: post #21
hannofcart wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess this works like the Javascript `const` keyword.

Java too. Rust is the only language I’ve used where “immutable” means everything through the whole reference tree is also immutable. Well, only language that allows mutation at all.

And C/C++. Probably other value based languages like Go and Zig.

JavaScript probably behaves like that because `const` was tacked on (and it's dynamically typed so there's no place to mark parameters as const). There is Object.freeze() which sort of makes something immutable, but it's not really the same.

Java doesn't even have const so I guess they just didn't care about const correctness or didn't have time to add it.

Re: Buzz: A lightweight statically typed scripting language

#24

Post by IshKebab »

lifthrasiir wrote: post #5

Not explicitly mentioned in the guide, but Buzz has a garbage collector [1] (can also be inferred via a casual mention of upvalues). So it has more focus on scripting than static typing I guess, but the language design doesn't look so to me. [1] https://buzz-lang.dev/reference/std/gc.html

Static typing is orthogonal to scripting or GC.

Re: Buzz: A lightweight statically typed scripting language

#25

Post by bmitc »

benrutter wrote: post #19

This comment section is very "why write a Language?" oriented. I love reading about new languages!! I work with data scientists a lot so I'll probably always use Python professionally, at least for the foreseeable future. But Python, JavaScript etc are huge languages with massive histories of practical trade offs and compromises. It's always exciting to see what someone's dream language looks like! Besides, learning…

For me, it's that this language already exists in F#. Other than "lightweight" (.NET probably inatalls just as fast as Python these days, though), it is the statically typed scripting language, in my opinion.

Re: Buzz: A lightweight statically typed scripting language

#26

Post by bmitc »

echelon wrote: post #9
spenczar5 wrote: post #2

I admire people who make projects like this. But it is so alien to me to try making something like a language. What is the motivation, and the goal? Surely it is practically a one-in-a-million chance to actually unseat Python or bash or Lua. I could never really justify using something like Buzz in a professional setting, just because it is too obscure and new. And look - if it is just for the joy of it, I get it! Bu…

> actually unseat Python or bash or Lua These languages each have enough warts that lots of people and languages are chipping away at them. Go and Nim are doing the strong static typing that "feels like scripting" thing. Even Rust is making a bit of a dent, despite it being a systems language with memory semantics. There's plenty of room for all sorts of projects to try. Don't count anyone out. Even if the language n…

Nothing is making a dent in Python. It's momentum is almost unfathomable in certain fields.

Re: Buzz: A lightweight statically typed scripting language

#27

Post by naitgacem »

IshKebab wrote: post #24
lifthrasiir wrote: post #5

Not explicitly mentioned in the guide, but Buzz has a garbage collector [1] (can also be inferred via a casual mention of upvalues). So it has more focus on scripting than static typing I guess, but the language design doesn't look so to me. [1] https://buzz-lang.dev/reference/std/gc.html

Static typing is orthogonal to scripting or GC.

English is not my native language, and "orthogonal concepts" always mean something along the lines of "mutually exclusive" in my head.

Re: Buzz: A lightweight statically typed scripting language

#28

Post by cowsandmilk »

IshKebab wrote: post #23
pkulak wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Java too. Rust is the only language I’ve used where “immutable” means everything through the whole reference tree is also immutable. Well, only language that allows mutation at all.

And C/C++. Probably other value based languages like Go and Zig. JavaScript probably behaves like that because `const` was tacked on (and it's dynamically typed so there's no place to mark parameters as const). There is Object.freeze() which sort of makes something immutable, but it's not really the same. Java doesn't even have const so I guess they just didn't care about const correctness or didn't have time to add…

Java has final, which I frequently find has junior dev advocates who believe it avoids changes that it doesn’t.

Re: Buzz: A lightweight statically typed scripting language

#29

Post by corethree »

echelon wrote: post #9
spenczar5 wrote: post #2

I admire people who make projects like this. But it is so alien to me to try making something like a language. What is the motivation, and the goal? Surely it is practically a one-in-a-million chance to actually unseat Python or bash or Lua. I could never really justify using something like Buzz in a professional setting, just because it is too obscure and new. And look - if it is just for the joy of it, I get it! Bu…

> actually unseat Python or bash or Lua These languages each have enough warts that lots of people and languages are chipping away at them. Go and Nim are doing the strong static typing that "feels like scripting" thing. Even Rust is making a bit of a dent, despite it being a systems language with memory semantics. There's plenty of room for all sorts of projects to try. Don't count anyone out. Even if the language n…

I don't know about Nim, but Go does not feel like scripting. It feels like C-style programming. Really old school and not good for scripting at all.

Re: Buzz: A lightweight statically typed scripting language

#30

Post by tubs »

naitgacem wrote: post #27
IshKebab wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Static typing is orthogonal to scripting or GC.

English is not my native language, and "orthogonal concepts" always mean something along the lines of "mutually exclusive" in my head.

It is used to say that there isn't really a relationship between them.
Post reply on HN