3 ms·
okay i have rewritten parts of it. I hope you folks take it for a spin; it has a lot of nice touches in it; worked very hard on the balance between concision an
by magicmouse 5y ago
okay i have rewritten parts of it. I hope you folks take it for a spin; it has a lot of nice touches in it; worked very hard on the balance between concision and readability.
- klyrs 5y agoI was amused to see you trash-talking COBOL on your blog, because the language snippets I've seen read a bit like COBOL.
- magicmouse 5y agoI don't see similarities with COBOL other than Beads has a low percentage of punctuation, but that is from imitating Python's indent-significant code structure style. COBOL generated a lot of billable hours. I did early years in my career as a consultant-for-hire in a SF body shop, and occasionally would have to fix some COBOL thing. I sure hated it. Woke up one day in a puddle of drool from passing out because of boredom, and then switched jobs. Beads is from a word-count metric, is probably within 20% of the minimum word count for the sample programs i presented, if you exclude techniques that greatly obfuscate the logic such as those used in Oscar Toledo's famous chess program. Substitution and concatenative languages like FORTH regularly win code-length contests, but they aren't very readable. Beads tries to find a happy medium between brevity and clarity. I think people writing it will enjoy the careful balance that was struck.