Streem – a new programming language from Matz

Post by breuleux » Thu, Dec 11, 2014, 8:34 PM UTC

nateabele wrote: post #51

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…

> However I hope that they provide some very robust tools for controlling input splitting Yes, splitting and combining. Looking at the code example, I feel like so much opportunity is just being squandered, where something like Rust's mapping constructs would feel so much better. Yours is definitely more in that vein, here's something a little closer: STDIN | /\w+/{|word| /house/ => "foo" /car/ => "bar" "literal" =>…

    STDIN | /\w+/ | {|each match|
      /house/   => "foo"
      /car/     => "bar"
      "literal" => "baz"
      _         => "dib"
    }

    seq(100) | {|each x| x * x} | {|reduce (x = 0, y)| x + y}

Post by mackwic » Thu, Dec 11, 2014, 8:37 PM UTC

GFK_of_xmaspast wrote: post #99

mackwic wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Everything you can do in sed you can do in perl, there's been sed-to-perl converters shipped with perl since the ur-times.

Post by kbenson » Thu, Dec 11, 2014, 8:41 PM UTC

c3RlcGhlbnI_ wrote: post #108

mackwic wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Post by blt » Thu, Dec 11, 2014, 8:47 PM UTC

boomlinde wrote: post #39

pcmonk wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not any shorter. The extra check as to whether or not to print the line break cancels out the mod 15 check. In my opinion, it's cleaner to have three conditionals of the same type than two checking mods and a third checking the OR of the first two. Of course, it can be actually shorter with a goto.

Whether you print the number, Fizz, Buzz or FizzBuzz you are going output a line break, so I'm not sure what you would be checking for. Output \n unconditionally.

Post by coldtea » Thu, Dec 11, 2014, 8:49 PM UTC

PhearTheCeal wrote: post #37

[deleted] wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[deleted]

noice, here's my version print("\n".join([("FIZZ"*(i%3==0)+"BUZZ"*(i%5==0)) or str(i) for i in range(1,101)]))