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

The Bosque Programming Language

microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 172 posts

Re: The Bosque Programming Language

#21

Post by _bxg1 »

"The Bosque programming language is designed for writing code that simple, obvious, and easy to reason about for both humans and machines. The key design features of the language provide ways to avoid accidental complexity in the development and coding process. The goal is improved developer productivity, increased software quality, and enabling a range of new compilers and developer tooling experiences."

Along with literally every other language. I really wish the splash pages for new languages would cut the boilerplate and just open with a list of the specific traits that make this one different from its peers.

Edit: it appears that this is relatively easy to find after visiting the repository. Still, that opening paragraph is meaningless, and many languages don't even make the worthwhile bits easy to find for those who actively seek them.

Re: The Bosque Programming Language

#22

Post by hacker_9 »

Only thing that caught my eye is the require syntax, which is nice, but then I thought what happens if this contract fails? Its possible you'd want to return false, or raise exception, or log error, or even correct value and continue. So whilst a nice feature, not practical IMO if it would always result in an exception.

Re: The Bosque Programming Language

#23

Post by _bxg1 »

_bxg1 wrote: post #21

"The Bosque programming language is designed for writing code that simple, obvious, and easy to reason about for both humans and machines. The key design features of the language provide ways to avoid accidental complexity in the development and coding process. The goal is improved developer productivity, increased software quality, and enabling a range of new compilers and developer tooling experiences." Along with…

The typed strings feature looks pretty cool.

Re: The Bosque Programming Language

#24

Post by mshockwave »

> Thus, Bosque does not have any undefined behavior

I think this is the one that should be highlighted most. Otherwise, from an engineering perspective, many of the other language features have already been implemented and widely used in other languages

Re: The Bosque Programming Language

#25

Post by DarkWiiPlayer »

_bxg1 wrote: post #21

"The Bosque programming language is designed for writing code that simple, obvious, and easy to reason about for both humans and machines. The key design features of the language provide ways to avoid accidental complexity in the development and coding process. The goal is improved developer productivity, increased software quality, and enabling a range of new compilers and developer tooling experiences." Along with…

http://terralang.org/ does a good job at telling you right away 1. what it is, 2. what it looks like and 3. what makes it different. I could write lots about how the language is great, but I also just realized that its home pages is pretty good for a programming language.

Re: The Bosque Programming Language

#26

Post by mrkmarron »

reikonomusha wrote: post #16
mrkmarron wrote: post #9

Hi project owner (Mark) here. It is a bit late in the evening for me but I will try to answer any questions when I can. The Bosque language is currently in a very early state with lots of work to do and not ready for practical use. However, I am very excited by the potential in the concepts and wanted to make the project a collaborative endeavor, including both other academics and developer community, from the start.…

Hello! Disclaimer: I haven’t read the full publication yet and I’ve only skimmed it. A lot of programming languages that are coming out these days talk about simplicity, lowering “cognitive load”, increasing expressiveness, being nimble/lightweight/easy/whatever, and—this one stated by you—reducing “accidental complexity”. When I looked at your grammar and some examples, I saw atomic building blocks that don’t lead t…

I would say accidental complexity comes from mostly historical reasons. Two sources discussed in the report are reference equality and looping. These make a ton of sense if you are implementing a language with a compiler that targets an x86 processor. They map naturally to the features of the hardware but make other tasks impractical, e.g. compilation to a FPGA or verifying a SemVer dependency update doesn’t break your application.

Section 5 of the paper explores some scenarios that, once this “accidental complexity” has been removed, become much more feasible. These types of experiences are currently aspirational, and much work remains, but the hope is to demonstrate the practicality and value of these concepts.

Re: The Bosque Programming Language

#27

Post by pmontra »

A random thought about the code samples. What do we gain from having to write

    point
instead of other languages'

    point.y = value
?

I believe that syntax should be designed to make things simple for developers, not for the designers of languages or for compilers.

Re: The Bosque Programming Language

#28

Post by mrkmarron »

logicallee wrote: post #11
mrkmarron wrote: post #9

Hi project owner (Mark) here. It is a bit late in the evening for me but I will try to answer any questions when I can. The Bosque language is currently in a very early state with lots of work to do and not ready for practical use. However, I am very excited by the potential in the concepts and wanted to make the project a collaborative endeavor, including both other academics and developer community, from the start.…

Could you comment on how you came up with the name, or its meaning?

It is a Spanish word used in the SouthWest US for forest along a river. No particular reason behind the name, just a unique and easily searchable choice.

Re: The Bosque Programming Language

#29

Post by UK-AL »

hacker_9 wrote: post #22

Only thing that caught my eye is the require syntax, which is nice, but then I thought what happens if this contract fails? Its possible you'd want to return false, or raise exception, or log error, or even correct value and continue. So whilst a nice feature, not practical IMO if it would always result in an exception.

I don't think they are runtime checks

Re: The Bosque Programming Language

#30

Post by emmanueloga_ »

pmontra wrote: post #27

A random thought about the code samples. What do we gain from having to write point instead of other languages' point.y = value ? I believe that syntax should be designed to make things simple for developers, not for the designers of languages or for compilers.

I don't know anything about the language but the first form suggests immutability (return a new point with the y property = to value), the second looks like mutating a struct
Post reply on HN