4 ms·

Closures are planned, indeed. About immutability, it's really a hard call for me to do here. C is very much about in-place data modification (as far as I know)

Closures are planned, indeed. About immutability, it's really a hard call for me to do here. C is very much about in-place data modification (as far as I know). Working with immutable objects seems to be a very different approach. What do you mean with "simplify the use of immutable data structures" ? Like a good support for const? Thanks for the feedback, I'll definitely look deeper into Boo to steal.. huh get inspiration from it ;)

Raphael_Amiard 17y ago
> About immutability, it's really a hard call for me to do here. C is very much about in-place data modification (as far as I know). Working with immutable objects seems to be a very different approach. Yeah i know what you mean. But anyway this is a whole other topic, and it could be programmed by third parties. The important part would be more about enforcing a transitive const keyword, and some other nice things like that.I think what the d people are doing at the moment is very interesting : http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/accu-functional.pdf http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/accu-functional.pdf Another question i had is, do you plan to provide any meta-programming facilities (macros) ? Boo is very interresting in this regard, i can only recommend you look into it. Oh and one last thing, how does ooc fare performance wise compared to plain c at the moment ? Also i've been toying a bit with ooc and it's very nice to code in. I will probably follow its evolution with a great lot of interrest. Thanks for your work and dedication !
jongraehl 17y ago
Look at http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/const3.html http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/const3.html also. C++0x and D both seem to allow compile time evaluation of expressions or even full functions that depend only on constants. I agree that mutable state is valuable and its use should be easy (boo Haskell). (note: the example the D article gives of C "int const p" should be "int const p")

Raphael_Amiard 17y ago

> About immutability, it's really a hard call for me to do here. C is very much about in-place data modification (as far as I know). Working with immutable objects seems to be a very different approach. Yeah i know what you mean. But anyway this is a whole other topic, and it could be programmed by third parties. The important part would be more about enforcing a transitive const keyword, and some other nice things like that.I think what the d people are doing at the moment is very interesting : http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/accu-functional.pdf http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/accu-functional.pdf Another question i had is, do you plan to provide any meta-programming facilities (macros) ? Boo is very interresting in this regard, i can only recommend you look into it. Oh and one last thing, how does ooc fare performance wise compared to plain c at the moment ? Also i've been toying a bit with ooc and it's very nice to code in. I will probably follow its evolution with a great lot of interrest. Thanks for your work and dedication !

jongraehl 17y ago

Look at http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/const3.html http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/const3.html also. C++0x and D both seem to allow compile time evaluation of expressions or even full functions that depend only on constants. I agree that mutable state is valuable and its use should be easy (boo Haskell). (note: the example the D article gives of C "int const p" should be "int const p")