4 ms·
I like significant invitation, but I still wouldn’t choose it if I was designing a language today. Functional-style programming has become much more popular si
by pansa2 2mo ago
I like significant invitation, but I still wouldn’t choose it if I was designing a language today.
Functional-style programming has become much more popular since Python was designed in the 1990s, and there doesn’t seem to be a good way to have Python-like significant indentation and also support true anonymous functions.
- maleldil 2mo agoHaskell has significant indentation and anonymous functions.
- ameliaquining 2mo agoHaskell's significant indentation is, in my experience, much worse than Python's at fading into the background by matching what you would have done anyway.
- winding 2mo agoAs I understand it, Mojo’s goal is to be able to match state of the art performance for parallel algorithms and be able to use the exotic GPU hardware. A functional style is not necessarily productive in that context. One interesting PL concept they implement are linear types https://mojolang.org/docs/std/traits/anytype/AnyType/ https://mojolang.org/docs/std/traits/anytype/AnyType/
- jampekka 2mo agoScala 3, F#, CoffeeScript, Nim, Haskell, Elm, PureScript...
- pjmlp 2mo agoTrue anonymous functions has nothing to do with indentation, ML derived languages are also indentation based. Guido doesn't want them in the language, as simple as that.