Clay language

[Guilherme Vieira]

On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 4:35 PM, bearophile <bearophileHUGS at lycos.com>wrote:

> Through Reddit I have found a link to some information about the Clay
> language, it wants to be (or it will be) a C++-class language, but it's not
> tied to C syntax. It shares several semantic similarities with D too. It
> looks like a cute language:
> https://github.com/jckarter/clay/wiki/
>
> Some small parts from the docs:
>
> --------------------------
>
> In Clay this:
> https://github.com/jckarter/clay/wiki/Syntax-desugaring
>
> static for (a in ...b)
>    c;
>
> is equivalent to:
>
> {
>    ref a = <first element of b>;
>    c;
> }
> {
>    ref a = <second element of b>;
>    c;
> }
> /* ... */
>
> I have an enhancement request about this for D:
> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4085
>
> --------------------
>
> The part about Safer pointer type system is very similar to what I did ask
> for D, and it looks similar to what Ada language does (for Clay this is just
> a proposal, not implemented yet, but Ada is a rock-solid language):
> https://github.com/jckarter/clay/wiki/Safer-pointer-type-system
>
> --------------------
>
> This is something that I want for D too, it's important:
>
> >Jonathan Shapiro (of BitC) makes an excellent argument that, in a systems
> language, it is often undesirable to depend on the whims of an ill-specified
> optimizer to convert abstract code into efficient machine code. The BitC
> specification thus includes the idea of guaranteed optimizations, to allow
> code to be written in a high-level style with predictably low or nonexistent
> runtime cost (link). [...] Because Clay seeks to support systems programming
> with high-level abstraction, certain patterns should be guaranteed to be
> optimized in a certain way, instead of being left to the whims of LLVM or a
> C compiler. Additional optimizations should not be prevented, however. [...]
> It should be possible to specify that one or more of these optimizations is
> required, and have the compiler raise an error when they cannot be applied
> for some reason.<
>
> https://github.com/jckarter/clay/wiki/Guaranteed-optimizations
>
> Bye,
> bearophile
>

+1 for static for and guaranteed optimizations. Can we put it in the
wishlist?

-- 
Atenciosamente / Sincerely,
Guilherme ("n2liquid") Vieira
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20101227/399426e9/attachment-0001.html>