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

Buzz: A lightweight statically typed scripting language

buzz-lang.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 91 posts

Re: Buzz: A lightweight statically typed scripting language

#61

Post by choppsv1 »

djur wrote: post #3

What should I be looking for here that distinguishes it from other lightweight statically-typed scripting languages? Performance? Tooling? Particularly good FFI? There are some syntactic quirks that don't convey any obvious benefit, like the use of '>' to indicate a return type. Since this language uses C-style prefixed type identifiers, why not do that for functions as well? Alternately, why not use the much more co…

Re: comment char: I couldn't agree more, went in excited by static typed, and was immediately turned off by this seemingly arbitrary divergence. I kept looking for other uses of, for example, `#` in the language that might explain this quirky comment char, but got to the end of the guide w/o finding any. Maybe the author will reconsider :)

Re: Buzz: A lightweight statically typed scripting language

#62

Post by cjdell »

otteromkram wrote: post #58
cjdell wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any in particular that you're a fan of? (Genuinely curious)

If you don't want to run awkward searches through your main Google account, DuckDuckGo provides decent results.

I didn't know DuckDuckGo could find me results about a particular person's preferences.

Yes you can Google pretty much anything that you can have a conversation about and never speak to anyone. What is your point?

Re: Buzz: A lightweight statically typed scripting language

#63

Post by skitter »

IshKebab wrote: post #23
pkulak wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Java too. Rust is the only language I’ve used where “immutable” means everything through the whole reference tree is also immutable. Well, only language that allows mutation at all.

And C/C++. Probably other value based languages like Go and Zig. JavaScript probably behaves like that because `const` was tacked on (and it's dynamically typed so there's no place to mark parameters as const). There is Object.freeze() which sort of makes something immutable, but it's not really the same. Java doesn't even have const so I guess they just didn't care about const correctness or didn't have time to add…

Afaik for C & C++, that's not true – you can turn const references into normal references and are even allowed to mutate the object they point to unless said object is declared as const.

Re: Buzz: A lightweight statically typed scripting language

#65

Post by Deukhoofd »

basro wrote: post #34
djur wrote: post #3

What should I be looking for here that distinguishes it from other lightweight statically-typed scripting languages? Performance? Tooling? Particularly good FFI? There are some syntactic quirks that don't convey any obvious benefit, like the use of '>' to indicate a return type. Since this language uses C-style prefixed type identifiers, why not do that for functions as well? Alternately, why not use the much more co…

What would be the other lightweight statically typed scripting languages? There really aren't many.

I've used AngelScript in the past for some hobby projects, and had a lot of fun with it.

https://www.angelcode.com/angelscript/

Re: Buzz: A lightweight statically typed scripting language

#66

Post by mr_ms »

cjdell wrote: post #35
junon wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There have been statically types scripting languages for ages. Embeddable ones, too. That's not new.

Any in particular that you're a fan of? (Genuinely curious)

I'm a fan or Umka. It is inspired by Go and can be embedded into C programs.

https://github.com/vtereshkov/umka-lang

Re: Buzz: A lightweight statically typed scripting language

#67

Post by christophilus »

bmitc wrote: post #25
benrutter wrote: post #19

This comment section is very "why write a Language?" oriented. I love reading about new languages!! I work with data scientists a lot so I'll probably always use Python professionally, at least for the foreseeable future. But Python, JavaScript etc are huge languages with massive histories of practical trade offs and compromises. It's always exciting to see what someone's dream language looks like! Besides, learning…

For me, it's that this language already exists in F#. Other than "lightweight" (.NET probably inatalls just as fast as Python these days, though), it is the statically typed scripting language, in my opinion.

I love me some F#, but F# isn't a scripting, and it's compile times were pretty terrible the last time I used it on Linux. It's been a while, though, so maybe things have improved.

Re: Buzz: A lightweight statically typed scripting language

#68

Post by bmitc »

christophilus wrote: post #67
bmitc wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me, it's that this language already exists in F#. Other than "lightweight" (.NET probably inatalls just as fast as Python these days, though), it is the statically typed scripting language, in my opinion.

I love me some F#, but F# isn't a scripting, and it's compile times were pretty terrible the last time I used it on Linux. It's been a while, though, so maybe things have improved.

Why do you say it's not a scripting language? You can write .fsx files and run them as scripts, and there's a nice REPL. Using Polyglot Notebooks, you can even combine several languages, including F# and PowerShell, and documentation and run the notebooks as scripts.

Were you running F# with modern .NET, i.e., .NET5+?

Re: Buzz: A lightweight statically typed scripting language

#69

Post by [deleted] »

Deukhoofd wrote: post #65
basro wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would be the other lightweight statically typed scripting languages? There really aren't many.

I've used AngelScript in the past for some hobby projects, and had a lot of fun with it. https://www.angelcode.com/angelscript/

[deleted]

Re: Buzz: A lightweight statically typed scripting language

#70

Post by IshKebab »

skitter wrote: post #63
IshKebab wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And C/C++. Probably other value based languages like Go and Zig. JavaScript probably behaves like that because `const` was tacked on (and it's dynamically typed so there's no place to mark parameters as const). There is Object.freeze() which sort of makes something immutable, but it's not really the same. Java doesn't even have const so I guess they just didn't care about const correctness or didn't have time to add…

Afaik for C & C++, that's not true – you can turn const references into normal references and are even allowed to mutate the object they point to unless said object is declared as const.

Only through an escape hatch (a big red flag one at that). You aren't supposed to.
Post reply on HN