The Earl Grey programming language • Hacker News Board

Re: The Earl Grey programming language

#131

Post by webjprgm » Sat, May 09, 2015, 1:50 AM UTC

breuleux wrote: post #125

webjprgm wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not a fan of using -> like CoffeeScript does. It doesn't seem to mean function-body / algorithm-to-do-the-thing to me. That operator makes sense for pointers or for function return value type expressions.

I think that's just because you are used to see it used that way. And it's not like CoffeeScript invented this. Haskell does it: \x -> x + 1 OCaml does it: fun (x : int) -> x + 1 It is very common in functional languages to use -> both for function bodies and return types.

I suppose. Kinda like => for "maps to" in some math / theory classes.

Re: The Earl Grey programming language

#132

Post by MadcapJake » Sat, May 09, 2015, 2:48 AM UTC

smorrow wrote: post #102

breuleux wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But see, being used to hyphens in variable names, I must tell you I can't figure out which one I find easier to read. On one hand, the presence of hyphens and subtraction is a tad confusing, but on the other, I find "balance-sheet" to be generally nicer to read than "balanceSheet", so it feels like a tie to me. Then, on the other hand, you have things like "xs.for-each(x -> x + 1)" vs "xs.forEach(x -> x + 1)", where…

> I find "balance-sheet" to be generally nicer to read than "balanceSheet" Me too, and I've wondered if it's because it's activating the same part of my brain that gets aggravated when people decide to use capitals on seemingly random words within the sentence.

To me it's almost cognitively dissonant to see a capitalized letter in the middle of a word. In written language grammars, we have only capitals at the beginnings of new sentences (new ideas), so my brain sees camelcase terms and wants to separate the words into separate terms.

Also, it feels morally wrong that the first word typically doesn't get the capitalization (and often languages ask/require programmers to follow some arbitrary first letter capitalization rules...). Yes, that's right, it's about ethics in programming language design.

Re: The Earl Grey programming language

#133

Post by spacemanmatt » Sat, May 09, 2015, 3:39 AM UTC

breuleux wrote: post #123

spacemanmatt wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Made correctly, earl grey (really any black tea) needs some milk fat to neutralize the tannic acid or it could turn your stomach.

I googled this because I find it interesting, but black tea does not contain tannic acid. It contains tannins, but of a completely different type (antioxydants which actually seem to be healthy). I couldn't find anything definitive on whether adding milk is a good idea or not. Maybe it helps for some people.

That's interesting. I wasn't 100% when I posted, it was from memory. On a little checking, it seems we're both right -- tannic acid is a subset of tannins. In any case, milk seems to help, whatever the mechanism.

Re: The Earl Grey programming language

#134

Post by hderms » Sat, May 09, 2015, 5:08 AM UTC

This is just extremely exciting. I love the language design and it looks usable as all hell. First compile-to-js language I've ever seen that got me excited, let alone the first one that i'd actually use outside of the browser. Congrats.

Re: The Earl Grey programming language

#135

Post by moomin » Sat, May 09, 2015, 7:58 AM UTC

moomin wrote: post #96

Now add an absolutely vital library called Milk and watch tea lovers everywhere shudder.

From the replies, it's clear the "one should never put tea in Earl Grey" meme isn't as widespread as I thought.

Re: The Earl Grey programming language

#136

Post by Dralletje » Sat, May 09, 2015, 3:34 PM UTC

thomasfoster96 wrote: post #101

mikejholly wrote: post #10

Await, pattern matching and macros are great language features Node and CoffeeScript both lack. Nice work!

Async/await is coming in ECMAScript 7, so Node will have it soon.

Define "soon" haha. With the speed of adopting ECMAScript 6 this "soon" could become really long.

Re: The Earl Grey programming language

#137

Post by baldfat » Sun, May 10, 2015, 1:42 PM UTC

breuleux wrote: post #124

webjprgm wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is also what I thought. I was disappointed to see no TNG references on the page.

I like Earl Grey tea, but I don't watch Star Trek, so it didn't even occur to me. Sorry about that :( On the other hand I have to admit I like the idea of calling utilities Picard or Engage, they have a nice ring to them. Hmm.

If you do add those references the people will love you!