Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
On 2014-02-27 21:43, Walter Bright wrote: This comes up now and then. The problem with it is it makes function overloading a near impossibility to untangle. We could quite easy add support for named parameters but still require using the same position of the arguments. I don't know if those wanting named parameters would be satisfied with this though. -- /Jacob Carlborg
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
Jacob Carlborg: We could quite easy add support for named parameters but still require using the same position of the arguments. I don't know if those wanting named parameters would be satisfied with this though. I think requiring the same position of the arguments goes against one of the main points of having named arguments. A (temporarily?) solution to Walter's problem (has someone shown examples of the problem?) is to just not allow the use of named arguments for overloaded functions. This is not a large problem because when you have named arguments, you have less need for function overloading. Bye, bearophile
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
On 2014-03-01 15:19:29 +, Jacob Carlborg d...@me.com said: On 2014-02-27 21:43, Walter Bright wrote: This comes up now and then. The problem with it is it makes function overloading a near impossibility to untangle. We could quite easy add support for named parameters but still require using the same position of the arguments. I don't know if those wanting named parameters would be satisfied with this though. I did implement something like that in DMD a while ago as an experiment. See the comments below that commit: https://github.com/michelf/dmd/commit/673bae4982ff18a3d216bc1578f50d40f4d26d7a Walter pointed out that it should work for template arguments. I agreed, devised a plan to restructure the whole thing to be less of a hack and make it works for templates, then I had no more time to put on this. :-( This planned restructuring did lead to a transition to type-checked arrays within DMD though, so the effort wasn't completely wasted. -- Michel Fortin michel.for...@michelf.ca http://michelf.ca
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
On Friday, 28 February 2014 at 12:12:38 UTC, bearophile wrote: Chris: Every time I write something in JS, I feel like a complete programming novice, Probably that's part of the problem. More experience in a language helps. I suggest to use TypeScript (http://www.typescriptlang.org/ ), it has static types, more Java-style classes, better modules, and more; that give a more tidy and ordered kind of coding. If JavaScript gains integers too, programming in TypeScript probably becomes bearable even for die hard D programmers :-) Bye, bearophile And now with full(native, i.e., not using a plug-in) support in Visual Studio 2013 check out http://blogs.msdn.com/b/mvpawardprogram/archive/2013/11/13/typescript-support-in-visual-studio-2013.aspx ;)
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
On 2014-03-01 17:19, Michel Fortin wrote: I did implement something like that in DMD a while ago as an experiment. See the comments below that commit: https://github.com/michelf/dmd/commit/673bae4982ff18a3d216bc1578f50d40f4d26d7a I based the quite easy on the few changes needed in your implementation. Walter pointed out that it should work for template arguments. I agreed, devised a plan to restructure the whole thing to be less of a hack and make it works for templates, then I had no more time to put on this. :-( That happens too often :( This planned restructuring did lead to a transition to type-checked arrays within DMD though, so the effort wasn't completely wasted. Nice :) -- /Jacob Carlborg
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
On Saturday, 1 March 2014 at 16:37:36 UTC, Asman01 wrote: On Friday, 28 February 2014 at 12:12:38 UTC, bearophile wrote: Chris: Every time I write something in JS, I feel like a complete programming novice, Probably that's part of the problem. More experience in a language helps. I suggest to use TypeScript (http://www.typescriptlang.org/ ), it has static types, more Java-style classes, better modules, and more; that give a more tidy and ordered kind of coding. If JavaScript gains integers too, programming in TypeScript probably becomes bearable even for die hard D programmers :-) Bye, bearophile And now with full(native, i.e., not using a plug-in) support in Visual Studio 2013 check out http://blogs.msdn.com/b/mvpawardprogram/archive/2013/11/13/typescript-support-in-visual-studio-2013.aspx ;) As soon as Microsoft releases a Linux version I will be sure to try it out :o)
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
On Saturday, 1 March 2014 at 18:57:03 UTC, Craig Dillabaugh wrote: On Saturday, 1 March 2014 at 16:37:36 UTC, Asman01 wrote: On Friday, 28 February 2014 at 12:12:38 UTC, bearophile wrote: Chris: Every time I write something in JS, I feel like a complete programming novice, Probably that's part of the problem. More experience in a language helps. I suggest to use TypeScript (http://www.typescriptlang.org/ ), it has static types, more Java-style classes, better modules, and more; that give a more tidy and ordered kind of coding. If JavaScript gains integers too, programming in TypeScript probably becomes bearable even for die hard D programmers :-) Bye, bearophile And now with full(native, i.e., not using a plug-in) support in Visual Studio 2013 check out http://blogs.msdn.com/b/mvpawardprogram/archive/2013/11/13/typescript-support-in-visual-studio-2013.aspx ;) As soon as Microsoft releases a Linux version I will be sure to try it out :o) Well, you will need to wait a while. :P
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
On Thursday, 27 February 2014 at 19:54:04 UTC, w0rp wrote: On Thursday, 27 February 2014 at 18:37:51 UTC, Craig Dillabaugh wrote: On Thursday, 27 February 2014 at 18:20:20 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote: clip Like it or not, JavaScript is good enough. Really? I've been stuck for the past week or so trying to put together a browser based UI using JavaScript + HTML for a work related project. It has been a painful experience. In fairness to JavaScript, I didn't know the language very well coming in, but still I've found working in this setting rather frustrating. If the future of applications is really client-server based applications, where the client is basically a VM (if we consider the browser a VM of sorts) surely there is room for a better development model than this HTML + Javascript mongrel. I developed 99% of the JavaScript part of an application for a year, and I have extensive JavaScript knowledge. After all that, I wrote this. https://w0rp.com/blog/post/javascript-sucks/ @Craigw0rp I really do understand yeez. Really. At the moment I'm working with JS (again). Nightmare. Disaster. The server side is programmed in D, the user (client) side needs JS, ain't no other way. I have made a real, real, real, rel effort, I've tried to replicate, mimic, emulate, imitate ... (running out of words here) every good programming pattern ever invented. But to no avail. JS is madness and I seriously don't understand why it has survived the way it is, why people just didn't abandon it years ago. It is madness. Frustration. Alienation. Every time I write something in JS, I feel like a complete programming novice, with the only difference that I know exactly what I want and how I would do it in any other programming language. But not so in JS. It defies reason and common human logic. JS degrades programmers. Years of experience are naught, you have to beg and cajole, you're at the mercy of a psychopathic tyrant. Whenever I program in JS I become highly irritable. When I program in D, I'm calm, I know what I want, and I know I will get it. I don't understand why we haven't got over JS yet. The Internet is so important and we still have to program things in JS. I don't get it. Now don't mention PHP with me ...
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
On Friday, 28 February 2014 at 11:21:51 UTC, Chris wrote: On Thursday, 27 February 2014 at 19:54:04 UTC, w0rp wrote: On Thursday, 27 February 2014 at 18:37:51 UTC, Craig Dillabaugh wrote: On Thursday, 27 February 2014 at 18:20:20 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote: clip Like it or not, JavaScript is good enough. Really? I've been stuck for the past week or so trying to put together a browser based UI using JavaScript + HTML for a work related project. It has been a painful experience. In fairness to JavaScript, I didn't know the language very well coming in, but still I've found working in this setting rather frustrating. If the future of applications is really client-server based applications, where the client is basically a VM (if we consider the browser a VM of sorts) surely there is room for a better development model than this HTML + Javascript mongrel. I developed 99% of the JavaScript part of an application for a year, and I have extensive JavaScript knowledge. After all that, I wrote this. https://w0rp.com/blog/post/javascript-sucks/ @Craigw0rp I really do understand yeez. Really. At the moment I'm working with JS (again). Nightmare. Disaster. The server side is programmed in D, the user (client) side needs JS, ain't no other way. I have made a real, real, real, rel effort, I've tried to replicate, mimic, emulate, imitate ... (running out of words here) every good programming pattern ever invented. But to no avail. JS is madness and I seriously don't understand why it has survived the way it is, why people just didn't abandon it years ago. It is madness. Frustration. Alienation. Every time I write something in JS, I feel like a complete programming novice, with the only difference that I know exactly what I want and how I would do it in any other programming language. But not so in JS. It defies reason and common human logic. JS degrades programmers. Years of experience are naught, you have to beg and cajole, you're at the mercy of a psychopathic tyrant. Whenever I program in JS I become highly irritable. When I program in D, I'm calm, I know what I want, and I know I will get it. I don't understand why we haven't got over JS yet. The Internet is so important and we still have to program things in JS. I don't get it. Now don't mention PHP with me ... There is another option here. Use another programming language. Thanks for this blog. Whenever I program in JS everything feels rather 'undefined'. I would love to see the day when JS becomes obsolete.
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
On Thursday, 27 February 2014 at 17:16:54 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote: Yep, that is how for example .NET, Eiffel, Smalltalk, Lisp and many other languages work. An object in Smalltalk is not a primitive type. Even ints, floats, chars, etc. in Smalltalk are no primitive types but objects. Not wanting to be a rogue. Just pointing out ;-).
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
Chris: Every time I write something in JS, I feel like a complete programming novice, Probably that's part of the problem. More experience in a language helps. I suggest to use TypeScript (http://www.typescriptlang.org/ ), it has static types, more Java-style classes, better modules, and more; that give a more tidy and ordered kind of coding. If JavaScript gains integers too, programming in TypeScript probably becomes bearable even for die hard D programmers :-) Bye, bearophile
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
On Friday, 28 February 2014 at 12:12:38 UTC, bearophile wrote: Chris: Every time I write something in JS, I feel like a complete programming novice, Probably that's part of the problem. More experience in a language helps. Unfortunately, you cannot get experienced in JS, there's always a new pitfall and the more you know it the more you hate it. If you don't hate it, you don't know it. On the bright side of things, JS teaches you how _not_ to do things and it makes you appreciate other languages, real programming languages. Programming is like this: Abstract concept of what you wanna do find out how to do it in C/Java/D/C#/Python ... JS Programming is like this: Abstract concept of what you wanna do find out how ... wait, why the f***k is it not stackoverflow ah, you cannot do this in JS ah, you can, but you have to reinvent the wheel now! wait, now, why the f***k loop through the above ... I suggest to use TypeScript (http://www.typescriptlang.org/ ), it has static types, more Java-style classes, better modules, and more; that give a more tidy and ordered kind of coding. If JavaScript gains integers too, programming in TypeScript probably becomes bearable even for die hard D programmers :-) Thanks a million, I'll check it out. Bye, bearophile
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
On Friday, 28 February 2014 at 12:12:38 UTC, bearophile wrote: Chris: Every time I write something in JS, I feel like a complete programming novice, Probably that's part of the problem. More experience in a language helps. I suggest to use TypeScript (http://www.typescriptlang.org/ ), Ah, no, it's MS. So is Silverlight. Don't like proprietary stuff. If Ceylon is real open source, great. I'm still dreaming of a language that will replace JS, not just compile to JS.
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
Am 28.02.2014 13:15, schrieb Bienlein: On Thursday, 27 February 2014 at 17:16:54 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote: Yep, that is how for example .NET, Eiffel, Smalltalk, Lisp and many other languages work. An object in Smalltalk is not a primitive type. Even ints, floats, chars, etc. in Smalltalk are no primitive types but objects. Not wanting to be a rogue. Just pointing out ;-). Yes they are, kind of, because the ones small enough to fit in registers, like SmallInteger are converted to primitive types by the JIT. The programmer cannot see it, because it is considered an implementation detail, likewise in the other environments I mentioned. -- Paulo
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
What needed to create language that can be run everywhere? I mean would it be hard to add support of running D code in web-browser? it's better to write all logic at one language, that on 2 or 3.
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
Timothee Cour:
* better way to define default constructors:
class Point {
num x;
num y;
num z;
// Syntactic sugar for setting z and x before the constructor
body runs.
Point(this.z, this.x){...}
}
This is more explicit and flexible than D's way for default
struct
constructors, which can only allow to set all fields in order,
without
skipping some, and doesn't allow to do anything else in the
ctor.
A variant of this idea was discussed, and I think it's a good
idea.
* distinguish integer divide (~/) vs divide (/), so that 5/2=2,
5~/2=2
* shorthand function declaration with = (used not just for
lambdas)
Both good. But for the first you need a different syntax in D.
* optional named parameters arguments (with simplest possible
syntax)
* import all except specified symbols:
import 'package:lib2/lib2.dart' hide foo; // Import all names
EXCEPT foo.
Probably both good, if well designed.
Bye,
bearophile
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
I don't like any of the syntax changes mentioned. I do like the suggestions for better IDEs and similar tools. We can always do more to improve these.
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
On Thursday, 27 February 2014 at 10:27:41 UTC, Timothee Cour
wrote:
A1)
Google's Dart (https://www.dartlang.org) looks like a very
promising
replacement for javascript. It can compile to javascript to
ensure
portability (but chromium runs it natively) but the language
itself reminds
more of D to a surprising extent. Dart language has features
such as:
static typing (but can also have dynamic typing, akin to
std.variant, with
better support/syntax than D)
ahead of time compilation
unicode support
built in serialization/deserialization via json
annotations
mixins (used to emulate multiple inheritance)
generics
vector/AA litterals
alias (called typedef in dart), is, assert
try/catch/finally
operator overloading
properties (same parenthesis-less caller syntax as in D)
delegates (called closures)
nesting functions, 1st class functions, lambda = syntax
DDOC (called dartdoc)
D-like syntax and nesting comments,
introspection (runtime only AFAIK)
A2)
Also features that would be nice to have in D or were better
designed than
in D:
* cascade operations: they perform a series of operations on
the members of
a single object:
foo.bar(1)..baz(3)
equivalent to:
foo.bar(1)
foo.baz(3)
* better way to define default constructors:
class Point {
num x;
num y;
num z;
// Syntactic sugar for setting z and x before the constructor
body runs.
Point(this.z, this.x){...}
}
This is more explicit and flexible than D's way for default
struct
constructors, which can only allow to set all fields in order,
without
skipping some, and doesn't allow to do anything else in the
ctor.
* named constructors
* distinguish integer divide (~/) vs divide (/), so that 5/2=2,
5~/2=2
* shorthand function declaration with = (used not just for
lambdas)
* for (var x in collection) //better syntax than
foreach(var;collection)
* better syntax for optional positional arguments:
void fun(int x, [int y, int z=3]){...}
Thinking of which, this would actually solve a long standing
problem in D,
that of specifying optional parameters AFTER a variadic
template:
void fun(T...)(T args, [string file=__FILE__,int
line=__LINE__]){...}
* export for libraries
* async/wait etc
* great IDE/debugger/package manager/static analyzer
also the following which I've previously proposed adding to D:
* string interpolation $variableName (or ${expression})
assert('foo. ${s.toUpperCase()} bar' == 'foo. STRING
INTERPOLATION bar');
* optional named parameters arguments (with simplest possible
syntax)
* import all except specified symbols:
import 'package:lib2/lib2.dart' hide foo; // Import all names
EXCEPT foo.
A3)
And then some design decisions which wouldn't work for D:
everything is an
object, no struct (just class), VM, etc.
A4)
there were may previous threads regarding using D on the web
via compiling
to javascript. In light of this it would seem a lot easier to
compile D to
dart.
I've hear that Microsoft's equivalent so-called TypeScript was
more successfully than Google's one, more people like much more
TypeScript syntax and features, like I do.
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
On 2/27/14, 7:19 AM, Timothee Cour wrote: And then some design decisions which wouldn't work for D: everything is an object, no struct (just class), VM, etc. In a programming language you can make everything look like an object but implement it as a primitive type. So that could work in D (but I think nobody would like it, although it can make the language much simpler).
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
Am 27.02.2014 17:48, schrieb Ary Borenszweig: On 2/27/14, 7:19 AM, Timothee Cour wrote: And then some design decisions which wouldn't work for D: everything is an object, no struct (just class), VM, etc. In a programming language you can make everything look like an object but implement it as a primitive type. So that could work in D (but I think nobody would like it, although it can make the language much simpler). Yep, that is how for example .NET, Eiffel, Smalltalk, Lisp and many other languages work.
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
On Thursday, 27 February 2014 at 10:27:41 UTC, Timothee Cour
wrote:
A1)
Google's Dart (https://www.dartlang.org) looks like a very
promising
replacement for javascript. It can compile to javascript to
ensure
portability (but chromium runs it natively)
No, neither Chromium nor even Chrome run it natively. Only
Dartium which is a separate browser.
* cascade operations: they perform a series of operations on
the members of a single object:
foo.bar(1)..baz(3)
equivalent to:
foo.bar(1)
foo.baz(3)
In D we can use
with(foo) { bar(1); bar(3); }
Pretty close.
Dart looks like a very nice language for front-end web
development indeed. If I was doing web-dev I would choose vibe.d
+ Dart combo.
Some features like its constructors and short form of methods I
would love to see in D too.
As for compiling D to Dart I'm not sure that's feasible. You'll
have to chop off lower half of it.
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
Am 27.02.2014 18:29, schrieb thedeemon: On Thursday, 27 February 2014 at 10:27:41 UTC, Timothee Cour wrote: A1) Google's Dart (https://www.dartlang.org) looks like a very promising replacement for javascript. It can compile to javascript to ensure portability (but chromium runs it natively) No, neither Chromium nor even Chrome run it natively. Only Dartium which is a separate browser. From what I understood on Dart talks last Google IO, work was planned to have V8 and Dart VM play together inside Chrome. Personally, I think unless Google pushes the language fro ChromeOS or Android, it will hardly get any real market size. Like it or not, JavaScript is good enough. On my field of work, it doesn't matter how many cool languages I know, we are usually bound by what the whole team is comfortable using, what the boss allows for and the technologies that are requested by the customers themselves. -- Paulo
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
On Thursday, 27 February 2014 at 18:20:20 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote: clip Like it or not, JavaScript is good enough. Really? I've been stuck for the past week or so trying to put together a browser based UI using JavaScript + HTML for a work related project. It has been a painful experience. In fairness to JavaScript, I didn't know the language very well coming in, but still I've found working in this setting rather frustrating. If the future of applications is really client-server based applications, where the client is basically a VM (if we consider the browser a VM of sorts) surely there is room for a better development model than this HTML + Javascript mongrel.
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
On Thursday, 27 February 2014 at 18:37:51 UTC, Craig Dillabaugh wrote: On Thursday, 27 February 2014 at 18:20:20 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote: clip Like it or not, JavaScript is good enough. Really? I've been stuck for the past week or so trying to put together a browser based UI using JavaScript + HTML for a work related project. It has been a painful experience. In fairness to JavaScript, I didn't know the language very well coming in, but still I've found working in this setting rather frustrating. If the future of applications is really client-server based applications, where the client is basically a VM (if we consider the browser a VM of sorts) surely there is room for a better development model than this HTML + Javascript mongrel. I developed 99% of the JavaScript part of an application for a year, and I have extensive JavaScript knowledge. After all that, I wrote this. https://w0rp.com/blog/post/javascript-sucks/
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
On Thursday, 27 February 2014 at 19:54:04 UTC, w0rp wrote: On Thursday, 27 February 2014 at 18:37:51 UTC, Craig Dillabaugh wrote: On Thursday, 27 February 2014 at 18:20:20 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote: clip Like it or not, JavaScript is good enough. Really? I've been stuck for the past week or so trying to put together a browser based UI using JavaScript + HTML for a work related project. It has been a painful experience. In fairness to JavaScript, I didn't know the language very well coming in, but still I've found working in this setting rather frustrating. If the future of applications is really client-server based applications, where the client is basically a VM (if we consider the browser a VM of sorts) surely there is room for a better development model than this HTML + Javascript mongrel. I developed 99% of the JavaScript part of an application for a year, and I have extensive JavaScript knowledge. After all that, I wrote this. https://w0rp.com/blog/post/javascript-sucks/ Great. Now I have something to go an read for laughs whenever I feel my blood-pressure exceeding safe limits :o)
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
On 27.2.2014 20:54, w0rp wrote: I developed 99% of the JavaScript part of an application for a year, and I have extensive JavaScript knowledge. After all that, I wrote this. https://w0rp.com/blog/post/javascript-sucks/ I think it was someone on Slashdot who posted this wonderful comment: JavaScript is a crap language that can't be fixed. If they ever add an honest garbage collector to the base language then most programs will delete themselves upon execution.
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
Am 27.02.2014 19:37, schrieb Craig Dillabaugh: On Thursday, 27 February 2014 at 18:20:20 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote: clip Like it or not, JavaScript is good enough. Really? I've been stuck for the past week or so trying to put together a browser based UI using JavaScript + HTML for a work related project. It has been a painful experience. In fairness to JavaScript, I didn't know the language very well coming in, but still I've found working in this setting rather frustrating. If the future of applications is really client-server based applications, where the client is basically a VM (if we consider the browser a VM of sorts) surely there is room for a better development model than this HTML + Javascript mongrel. I didn't say I like it that much, just that it is good enough for what enterprise applications, my field of work, are about. So unless the browser vendors start supporting other languages, our customers will only ask for JavaScript, because it is easier to find guys when doing maintenance support. They don't care about Dart, TypeScript, CoffeScript, or whatever might be the flavour of the month, because it increases their problems to find people and their internal teams usually don't know those languages anyway. The same to any other language out there. Usually when I get to work on a cool language at the enterprise level, it is no longer cool, or it was brought in because some startup belonging to someone close to the CTO managed to sneak it in. The is of course my enterprise world, yours may vary. -- Paulo
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
On 2/27/2014 2:19 AM, Timothee Cour wrote: * optional named parameters arguments (with simplest possible syntax) This comes up now and then. The problem with it is it makes function overloading a near impossibility to untangle.
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
On 2/27/2014 2:19 AM, Timothee Cour wrote: * import all except specified symbols: import 'package:lib2/lib2.dart' hide foo; // Import all names EXCEPT foo. As a general rule, negation features are frequently misunderstood, our brains tend to just not see the negation. One should positively import names, not negatively not import some. And there's the maintenance problem - what did the importer mean to do when the imported module adds a 'bar' name?
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
On 2/27/2014 2:19 AM, Timothee Cour wrote:
* cascade operations: they perform a series of operations on the members of a
single object:
foo.bar(1)..baz(3)
equivalent to:
foo.bar(1)
foo.baz(3)
D has ranges and algorithms to conveniently chain operations.
* better way to define default constructors:
class Point {
num x;
num y;
num z;
// Syntactic sugar for setting z and x before the constructor body runs.
Point(this.z, this.x){...}
}
This is more explicit and flexible than D's way for default struct constructors,
which can only allow to set all fields in order, without skipping some, and
doesn't allow to do anything else in the ctor.
D doesn't allow non-trivial default struct constructors for some good reasons,
which are a long discussion we've had many times. These reasons don't apply to
javascript.
* named constructors
I don't see the point of such over using the factory method idiom.
* distinguish integer divide (~/) vs divide (/), so that 5/2=2, 5~/2=2
Such are needed so rarely - in C they are done with the modf function, and I've
never seen modf used in the wild.
* shorthand function declaration with = (used not just for lambdas)
tomayto, tomahto :-)
* for (var x in collection) //better syntax than foreach(var;collection)
tomayto, tomahto
* better syntax for optional positional arguments:
void fun(int x, [int y, int z=3]){...}
Thinking of which, this would actually solve a long standing problem in D, that
of specifying optional parameters AFTER a variadic template:
void fun(T...)(T args, [string file=__FILE__,int line=__LINE__]){...}
Not sure what that is.
* export for libraries
What does that mean?
* async/wait etc
Those are a great idea, and we need to do them at some point.
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
Walter Bright:
* optional named parameters arguments (with simplest possible
syntax)
This comes up now and then. The problem with it is it makes
function overloading a near impossibility to untangle.
Do you have an example of the problem?
* better way to define default constructors:
class Point {
num x;
num y;
num z;
// Syntactic sugar for setting z and x before the
constructor body runs.
Point(this.z, this.x){...}
}
This is more explicit and flexible than D's way for default
struct constructors,
which can only allow to set all fields in order, without
skipping some, and
doesn't allow to do anything else in the ctor.
D doesn't allow non-trivial default struct constructors for
some good reasons, which are a long discussion we've had many
times. These reasons don't apply to javascript.
The idea of having some syntax like this is nice, it reduces the
poilerplace code, making the code less noisy and reducing the
probability of the currenty common bugs caused by having fields
and arguments with equal or similar names:
class Foo {
int x;
this(this.x) {}
void inc(int x) { this.x += x; }
}
* shorthand function declaration with = (used not just for
lambdas)
tomayto, tomahto :-)
There is an enhancement request on this in Bugzilla.
A shorter syntax for simple functions is handy, because one-line
functions have become very common in D.
Bye,
bearophile
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 12:56 PM, Walter Bright newshou...@digitalmars.comwrote: On 2/27/2014 2:19 AM, Timothee Cour wrote: * cascade operations: they perform a series of operations on the members of a single object: foo.bar(1)..baz(3) equivalent to: foo.bar(1) foo.baz(3) D has ranges and algorithms to conveniently chain operations. cascade != chaining: cascade: a.f1..f2..f3 = a.f1 a.f2 a.f3 chaining: a.f1.f2.f3 = ((a.f1).f2).f3)
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
* better syntax for optional positional arguments:
void fun(int x, [int y, int z=3]){...}
Thinking of which, this would actually solve a long standing problem in
D, that
of specifying optional parameters AFTER a variadic template:
void fun(T...)(T args, [string file=__FILE__,int line=__LINE__]){...}
Not sure what that is.
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8687 : Variadic templates do
not work properly with default arguments
* export for libraries
What does that mean?
http://wiki.dlang.org/DIP45
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 2:40 PM, bearophile bearophileh...@lycos.comwrote: Walter Bright: * optional named parameters arguments (with simplest possible syntax) This comes up now and then. The problem with it is it makes function overloading a near impossibility to untangle. Do you have an example of the problem? Not sure what the problem would be. We could apply the same rules as for template overloading, ie error when there's a potential ambiguity (or even disable overloading for functions with named parameter until details are ironed out). Many languages have this, for good reason (discussed, again, many times).
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
We could kinda do named parameters today like this: ParameterTypeTuple!foo args; args.named_param = 3; foo(args); It would be nice if we could declare a variable inside a with(auto x = foo) like we can in if() too.
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
* better way to define default constructors:
class Point {
num x;
num y;
num z;
// Syntactic sugar for setting z and x before the constructor body
runs.
Point(this.z, this.x){...}
}
This is more explicit and flexible than D's way for default struct
constructors,
which can only allow to set all fields in order, without skipping some,
and
doesn't allow to do anything else in the ctor.
D doesn't allow non-trivial default struct constructors for some good
reasons, which are a long discussion we've had many times. These reasons
don't apply to javascript.
I don't recall this syntax 'Point(this.z, this.x){...}' ever being
discussed; can you please provide a link?
* it avoids the following common bug:
struct Point{int x;int y;}
auto a=Point(1,2,3);
//later on we add a field: struct Point{int x; int a; int y; }
//woops!
* less boilerplate / more DRY / more explicit:
struct Point{
Foo x=32;
Bar y;
Baz z;
this(this.y, this.z){} //instead of this(Bar y, Baz z){this.y=y;this.z=z;}
}
This is arguably a preferable syntax.
Re: Dart and D: features that could be used in D, D-dart for web programming
On Thu, 2014-02-27 at 19:20 +0100, Paulo Pinto wrote: […] From what I understood on Dart talks last Google IO, work was planned to have V8 and Dart VM play together inside Chrome. Dartium is a build of Chromium with both, so this is very much the direction that is possible. Personally, I think unless Google pushes the language fro ChromeOS or Android, it will hardly get any real market size. Like it or not, JavaScript is good enough. On my field of work, it doesn't matter how many cool languages I know, we are usually bound by what the whole team is comfortable using, what the boss allows for and the technologies that are requested by the customers themselves. Dart has a JavaScript translation back end, so could have a role very much like CoffeeScript – which arguably hasn't been that successful given jQuery, Backbone, Ember, Angular, etc. Ceylon has both JVM and JavaScript back ends and is targetted at end-to-end single language working: Ceylon in the browser, Ceylon on the server. If some of the FUD and prejudice that is being put about by innovation haters in the Javaverse can be overcome, I think Ceylon could be a big player in the game of Web applications and services. -- Russel. = Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.win...@ekiga.net 41 Buckmaster Roadm: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: rus...@winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder
