21–30 of 120 posts
This is the greatest thing ever... except... can it solve the halting problem?
It would still be compliant with the standard.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Source control allows one to bypass the moral purity of Vigil by recovering arbitrary sinful code from the past. Moral purity can not be advanced while the sins of the past remain with us forever, uncleansed. One can only properly use Vigil without any sort of source control. Even copying files before the compiler tries to run it is an attempt to cheat the system; for that, Vigil would be justified in deleting your e…
I was thinking that it would remove the offending source code from history -- a revisionist source control system, if you will, to show that we have always been at war with Eastasia.
Supposedly an unreleased version of the GHC Haskell compiler had this feature first: https://twitter.com/bos31337/status/116372971509121025
You know, I don't think this is a half bad idea. I mean, deleting offending code is a bit much, but shouldn't a code-by-contract language not allow code that failed a contract to be compiled until it changes? That would seem to make sense.
To make this actually useful, instead of deleting bad functions, it's probably better to make the offending functions throw a special exception when they are called, signaling the calling of a function known to be bad. This way, you can still inspect the code for the offending functions and fix the bugs. Otherwise, the original code could just totally disappear after multiple runs. What good is non-buggy code if it d…
illa 'quis et me' inquit 'miseram et te perdidit, Orpheu,
quis tantus furor? en iterum crudelia retro
fata vocant, conditque natantia lumina somnus.
iamque vale: feror ingenti circumdata nocte
invalidasque tibi tendens, heu non tua, palmas.'
dixit et ex oculis subito, ceu fumus in auras
commixtus tenuis, fugit diversa, neque illum
prensantem nequiquam umbras et multa volentem
dicere praeterea vidit; nec portitor Orci
amplius obiectam passus transire paludem.