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

Streem – a new programming language from Matz

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 199 posts

Re: Streem – a new programming language from Matz

#101

Post by tupshin »

icedog wrote: post #84
dragonwriter wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, its more direct in that, while it increases the number of branches, it minimizes the number of statements executed on any branch. It's also the solution that maps most directly to the problem statement, and, absent a strong technical reason to do otherwise, a direct mapping from requirements to code is a good thing.

I disagree that it maps most directly to the problem statement. You're performing a common factor computation in your mind, which may be more difficult given numbers other than 3 and 5. In my opinion, pattern matching offers the most direct solution and comes with an abundance of compiler optimizations. Here's an example in Rust... for i in range(1i, 101) { match (i % 3, i % 5) { (0, 0) => println!("Fizzbuzz"), (0, _…

If only rust had (optional only, please) fall through on matches, then you could skip a whole line :D

Re: Streem – a new programming language from Matz

#104

Post by slapresta »

gaius wrote: post #85
danso wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does he really get a "lot of flak" for Ruby? While I know not everyone loves Ruby, it seems crazy to me that people would denigrate Matz on a personal level...to me (admittedly, a novice in designing languages), Ruby always seemed well-thought out...that is, the trade-offs do not seem out of line given the philosophical benefits, and not everyone can make claim to turning a personal project into a worldwide language.…

I don't think so many people have a problem with Ruby the language so much as the culture around Rails.

What would be the point of blaming Matz for that?

Re: Streem – a new programming language from Matz

#107

Post by icedog »

dragonwriter wrote: post #98
icedog wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree that it maps most directly to the problem statement. You're performing a common factor computation in your mind, which may be more difficult given numbers other than 3 and 5. In my opinion, pattern matching offers the most direct solution and comes with an abundance of compiler optimizations. Here's an example in Rust... for i in range(1i, 101) { match (i % 3, i % 5) { (0, 0) => println!("Fizzbuzz"), (0, _…

> I disagree that it maps most directly to the problem statement. You're performing a common factor computation in your mind, which may be more difficult given numbers other than 3 and 5. Well, sure, explicitly calling out i % 15 rather than (i % 3) && (i % 5) or the equivalent has that problem. > In my opinion, pattern matching offers the most direct solution and comes with an abundance of compiler optimizations. Pa…

I'll take an extra branch over concatenation and dealing with new line chars any day.

Re: Streem – a new programming language from Matz

#108

Post by c3RlcGhlbnI_ »

mackwic wrote: post #69
c3RlcGhlbnI_ wrote: post #42

I am glad that someone is working on a new stream processing language, it is a very interesting paradigm. However I hope that they provide some very robust tools for controlling input splitting. As I have spent too much time fighting with awk and wishing it was more flexible(it is frustrating always having exactly two levels of splitting with only matchers on the first and only inverse splitting on the second). As is…

Awesome ! Let's call it sed ! Reference: https://www.gnu.org/software/sed/manual/sed.html#Examples Sorry, I couldn't miss that one. :) Really, check the example. Sed is most powerful tool and can do astonishing work.

That manual is possibly the single most useful technical document that I have ever read. It has enabled me to write extremely powerful programs that no one I know can understand.

It would however be nice to have a tool with similar power but simpler, more comprehensible syntax. One of the other commenters linked to an interesting document on sam, which has a better control flow but equally arcane syntax.

Re: Streem – a new programming language from Matz

#110

Post by c3RlcGhlbnI_ »

mamcx wrote: post #89
c3RlcGhlbnI_ wrote: post #42

I am glad that someone is working on a new stream processing language, it is a very interesting paradigm. However I hope that they provide some very robust tools for controlling input splitting. As I have spent too much time fighting with awk and wishing it was more flexible(it is frustrating always having exactly two levels of splitting with only matchers on the first and only inverse splitting on the second). As is…

" new stream processing language"... which are the olds? I'm playing with the idea of build a language, where the functions are unix-like, with STDIN, OUT & ERR. So, instead of raise a exception, it put data in ERR... and make it easy to compose them.

There don't seem to be that many that work on text streams, which is what I was referring to. The ones I am aware of are awk, shell scripting languages(bash, zsh, ksh, etc.), and the ed like DSLs( sed, ed, sam, etc.). I think there are others that are not as widely used.

If you google stream processing language you will also get a whole bunch that are not text specific. They are definitely worth looking at if you are interested in building any kind of stream based language.

Post reply on HN