2 ms·
I think it's closer to "the Scala of compile-t-JS languages" :) ...last time I checked Python didn't have macros and syntax for currying, function composition,
by nnq 13y ago
I think it's closer to "the Scala of compile-t-JS languages" :) ...last time I checked Python didn't have macros and syntax for currying, function composition, piping etc. and its TIMTOWTDI philosophy seems closer to Ruby.
Honestly, the macros section scared me out, especially the "there are five types of macro syntaxes" (...this is as far away from the pythonic way of doing things as one can get) but this seems the most promising compile-to-Js language I've seen.
- cameronkknight 13y agoMacros can be scary. The need for five different syntaxes is because in a non-homoiconic language, positioning and syntax matter, so having an infix operator would be defined differently from a call-like macro. They all act fundamentally the same, it's just how you define the syntax of how they are used that is the difference.
- Too 13y agoPython has functools.partial for currying. Not built into the syntax but in the standard lib.