3 ms·

I'm not a C programmer, but in general, I think this is a great idea. I really wish that it could be added to a high-level language. However, I think it's funda

by tomp 12y ago

I'm not a C programmer, but in general, I think this is a great idea. I really wish that it could be added to a high-level language. However, I think it's fundamentally incompatible with some of the features of high-level languages, such as dynamic typing, first-class functions, partial application, parametric polymorphism, structural typing/extensible records...

eru 12y ago
Why is dynamic typing a feature of high level languages? I know quite a few high level languages that are statically typed. And what does C have to do with C++?
- tomp 12y ago
  It's not a necessary feature of high-level languages, but you won't find it in a low-level language. The same with all other features I've mentioned.
vidarh 12y ago
I'm uncertain what languages other than C++ you think would benefit much from this. The reason C++ would benefit from this in the first place is because of a combination of its lack of higher level features (e.g. enabling extension/mixing in functionality in less painful ways) and its "C legacy" in the form of vast amounts of non-OO code. E.g. consider a language like Ruby, which has most of what you list as features of "high-level languages". For Ruby this would be very weird to begin with, because Ruby does not have non-member functions - everything calleable in Ruby is a method; what looks like free-standing functions in Ruby are functions on an object whose eigenclass is the implicit outermost scope. What we'd do instead in Ruby is to put "function like" methods in a module that we can include in whatever objects we want. But you can in fact easily achieve what this proposal does in Ruby.
- tomp 12y ago
  Many languages that are not primarily object-oriented. E.g. it was proposed in Rust [1]. It could also be added to many other functional languages, as often the "object-oriented" function call syntax looks more natural (when the first parameter is "special", the object of the call) than the "mathematical" function call syntax (appropriate for when parameters are equivalent, e.g. `max()` or `dot_product()`). [1] https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/rust-dev/2013-October/006034.html https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/rust-dev/2013-October/006...

by tomp 12y ago

eru 12y ago

Why is dynamic typing a feature of high level languages? I know quite a few high level languages that are statically typed. And what does C have to do with C++?

tomp 12y ago
It's not a necessary feature of high-level languages, but you won't find it in a low-level language. The same with all other features I've mentioned.

vidarh 12y ago

I'm uncertain what languages other than C++ you think would benefit much from this. The reason C++ would benefit from this in the first place is because of a combination of its lack of higher level features (e.g. enabling extension/mixing in functionality in less painful ways) and its "C legacy" in the form of vast amounts of non-OO code. E.g. consider a language like Ruby, which has most of what you list as features of "high-level languages". For Ruby this would be very weird to begin with, because Ruby does not have non-member functions - everything calleable in Ruby is a method; what looks like free-standing functions in Ruby are functions on an object whose eigenclass is the implicit outermost scope. What we'd do instead in Ruby is to put "function like" methods in a module that we can include in whatever objects we want. But you can in fact easily achieve what this proposal does in Ruby.

tomp 12y ago
Many languages that are not primarily object-oriented. E.g. it was proposed in Rust [1]. It could also be added to many other functional languages, as often the "object-oriented" function call syntax looks more natural (when the first parameter is "special", the object of the call) than the "mathematical" function call syntax (appropriate for when parameters are equivalent, e.g. `max()` or `dot_product()`). [1] https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/rust-dev/2013-October/006034.html https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/rust-dev/2013-October/006...