-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Commentary on Syntax #1
Comments
Conditionals
Functions
Absolutely, I will update the draft. Only issue is that the + operator can have a variable number of parameters and and it blurs the line as to where this stops, we will need a way to wrap inline declarations. Classes and Methods
The example was bad, I suppose this is more an issue with scope. I was thinking that capitalized values are accessible from deeper levels.
Loops, foreach and whileAll functions always implicitly recurse. |
Could we get a different symbol for comment blocks vs. line comments? Having the same symbol makes for ambiguous situations |
Do you like
and
|
Mostly just thoughts and stuff on the various sections:
Conditionals
<=
or<=
?||
and&&
?Functions and Conditions
I dislike the parens here. I feel like the language has made it this far without them, and could instead be incorporated with the
!
syntax, much like Haskell's$
. So the function could thus become:The
+
operator would end up chewing up param1 and param2, leaving the result and 10 to be compared.Classes and Methods
This is one thing thats always been a little hazy for me. In the following examples:
Are val1 and val2 persistent across instances of this class? I usually view these things as something more akin to namespaces, which I'm not sure is what you're going for. I'd rather instead see something like:
I guess from the syntax it's clear that these values are stored inside the instance. I don't really care either way on this one.
Loops, foreach and while
This is just something I'd like clarification on:
Are these two functions equivalent? From an implementation perspective it would be very simple to assume all functions always implicitly recurse.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: