If Odin Had Macros
gingerbill.org
If Odin Had Macros
1–10 of 29 posts
Re: If Odin Had Macros
#2Something I don’t get.
Odin doesn’t support closures (a la C++ or Rust)
The thing is, I don’t understand why.
Odin’s FAQ says it’s because closures require automatic memory management. [0] But if that’s the case, why do languages like C++ and Ada [1] support closures?
[0] https://odin-lang.org/docs/faq/#does-odin-have-closures
[1] https://learn.adacore.com/courses/advanced-ada/parts/resourc...
Re: If Odin Had Macros
#3Something I don’t get. Odin doesn’t support closures (a la C++ or Rust) The thing is, I don’t understand why. Odin’s FAQ says it’s because closures require automatic memory management. [0] But if that’s the case, why do languages like C++ and Ada [1] support closures? [0] https://odin-lang.org/docs/faq/#does-odin-have-closures [1] https://learn.adacore.com/courses/advanced-ada/parts/resourc...
I can't speak for Ada, but C++ closures require that you explicitly specify what's captured from the enclosing environment and how (i.e. copy or reference). That capture is also unsafe, which relates to the issue of automatic memory management: for instance, if you have a function that returns a closure that's captured a reference to something in the function's stack frame, stack semantics mean that value will be destroyed. I'm sure C++ developers are fine with them but - having not used them in anger - they sound quite brittle.
The answer in the Odin FAQ maybe could be expanded to say "many uses of closures require automatic memory management, and while Odin could add some kind of support for closures to handle the uses that don't, it'd add too much complexity and too much potential for bugs to be worthwhile". Not to speak for gingerbill, here.
Re: If Odin Had Macros
#4Something I don’t get. Odin doesn’t support closures (a la C++ or Rust) The thing is, I don’t understand why. Odin’s FAQ says it’s because closures require automatic memory management. [0] But if that’s the case, why do languages like C++ and Ada [1] support closures? [0] https://odin-lang.org/docs/faq/#does-odin-have-closures [1] https://learn.adacore.com/courses/advanced-ada/parts/resourc...
Automatic memory management isn’t necessary for closures, but if you don’t have it then it is easy to have dangling pointers (e.g. you capture a local variable by reference, return the closure object, and then call the closure and use the referenced variable). This is a problem in C++ but isn’t in Ada due to Ada’s stricter scoping rules. Capturing variables by value is safe (assuming the captured values contain no dangling references themselves). It might require allocation if there were type-erased function objects (like std::function in C++), but this could be done using explicit allocator and deallocator functions with some help from the compiler to determine the closure object’s size.
Re: If Odin Had Macros
#5> The road to hell is not paved with good intentions but rather the lack of intention.
Although I am a man who seemingly seems to love the idea of a freedom of a language like nim,julia,lisp,(scala?) etc., just langauges which can give you a lot of freedom in general, my intention has always been: I have been asking for freedom irl, what is wrong with giving developers freedom in programming languages.
I can still respect this opinion and I followed up on pragmatic choice and I mean, its Mr's Wilson's language and honestly the freedom to have a language like this might be freedom in it of itself too and I can respect his opinions and I might check odin again later too.
https://skytrias.itch.io/todool I saw it from Odin lang page a long time back ago and I actually really loved this tool/ am thinking of creating an open source alternative in an another language like golang/kotlin/typescript/nim (i like to imagine things and be lazy sometimes lol) but there are definitely a lot of projects like jangafx which are written in odin iirc which are definitely really impressive
I will also think about this statement more as I do think that the reason why I sometimes lack intention is because I want to define good first, I don't want to take my opinions and run with it if they hurt people directly or indirectly and I am willing to have lack of opinions first to really understand the situation I suppose but I can respect his opinion in this thing too. Something worth thinking about for me. So thanks!
Re: If Odin Had Macros
#6> The road to hell is not paved with good intentions but rather the lack of intention. Although I am a man who seemingly seems to love the idea of a freedom of a language like nim,julia,lisp,(scala?) etc., just langauges which can give you a lot of freedom in general, my intention has always been: I have been asking for freedom irl, what is wrong with giving developers freedom in programming languages. I can still re…
All of those languages have a lot of freedom, you just ("just") need to reach into the FFI to do it. Lua, which is the only one I have used extensively, is the most literal definition of scripting. It's designed to be written in conjunction with C. Even languages like Haskell with a gigantic runtime still expect you to put in some C for hot paths.
Re: If Odin Had Macros
#7Something I don’t get. Odin doesn’t support closures (a la C++ or Rust) The thing is, I don’t understand why. Odin’s FAQ says it’s because closures require automatic memory management. [0] But if that’s the case, why do languages like C++ and Ada [1] support closures? [0] https://odin-lang.org/docs/faq/#does-odin-have-closures [1] https://learn.adacore.com/courses/advanced-ada/parts/resourc...
Conceptually, think about it. Coroutines require copying not only the variables but the function itself, outside of the lifetime of the parent function. (Or at least pointers thereto.) I would like to hear about a language with static coroutines but I am not aware of any. Even Rust doesn't do it, they just make you pass the lifetime around.
Re: If Odin Had Macros
#8> The road to hell is not paved with good intentions but rather the lack of intention. Although I am a man who seemingly seems to love the idea of a freedom of a language like nim,julia,lisp,(scala?) etc., just langauges which can give you a lot of freedom in general, my intention has always been: I have been asking for freedom irl, what is wrong with giving developers freedom in programming languages. I can still re…
All of those languages have a lot of freedom, you just ("just") need to reach into the FFI to do it. Lua, which is the only one I have used extensively, is the most literal definition of scripting. It's designed to be written in conjunction with C. Even languages like Haskell with a gigantic runtime still expect you to put in some C for hot paths.
FFI scares me if I am being honest and that is why I always try to think of a language which can do a lot of things themselves without having to reach for FFI thinking its going to be my last resort most of the time.
So that was my perspective when I had written up my comment.
What are some really good languages for FFI? Lua as you suggest?
I have always had this notion that FFI is really hard and so firstly I would like to ask if that's really true and secondly is there a langauge which can make it easy to work with FFI the most? Like do you suggest lua for something?
Re: If Odin Had Macros
#9Something I don’t get. Odin doesn’t support closures (a la C++ or Rust) The thing is, I don’t understand why. Odin’s FAQ says it’s because closures require automatic memory management. [0] But if that’s the case, why do languages like C++ and Ada [1] support closures? [0] https://odin-lang.org/docs/faq/#does-odin-have-closures [1] https://learn.adacore.com/courses/advanced-ada/parts/resourc...
what ginger bill actually said was
> I’d argue that actual closures which are unified everywhere as a single procedure type with non-capturing procedure values require some form of automatic-memory-management. That does not necessarily garbage collection nor ARC, but it could be something akin to RAII. This is all still automatic and against the philosophy of Odin.
C++ doesn't have this feature either. A C++ closure does not have the same type as a regular C-style function with the same argument types and result type. The types of functions and closures are not unified.
And C++ does have RAII, which the author feels is a kind of automatic memory management and against the philosophy of Odin.
So C++ doesn't have the feature G.B. says is impossible. I don't know enough to comment on Ada.
Re: If Odin Had Macros
#10Something I don’t get. Odin doesn’t support closures (a la C++ or Rust) The thing is, I don’t understand why. Odin’s FAQ says it’s because closures require automatic memory management. [0] But if that’s the case, why do languages like C++ and Ada [1] support closures? [0] https://odin-lang.org/docs/faq/#does-odin-have-closures [1] https://learn.adacore.com/courses/advanced-ada/parts/resourc...
Conceptually, think about it. Coroutines require copying not only the variables but the function itself, outside of the lifetime of the parent function. (Or at least pointers thereto.) I would like to hear about a language with static coroutines but I am not aware of any. Even Rust doesn't do it, they just make you pass the lifetime around.
The parent is talking about closures, not coroutines. Rust does have closures that don't require a GC or passing lifetimes around (there's not even any syntax for putting a lifetime on a closure).