Archetype language

[KennyTM~]

On Mar 21, 11 07:41, bearophile wrote:
> KennyTM~:
>
>> And this change makes integers look like they are iterable,
>
> That's not so good, I agree :-)
>
>
>> This makes 'if' looks like a template :p.
>
> I agree, that may cause troubles in D. Not good.
>
>
>> Yeah this was tried once and becomes a mess in detail :)
>
> I remember part of the discussion, and I think it's a not so messy situation. I think it's doable.
>
>
>> So how Archetype deals with 0 and 1-tuple?
>
> I don't know, I presume as Python. In that discussion I said to Walter than the 1-tuple cause problems in Python. In the meantime I have changed my mind a bit: 1-tuple syntax in Python is not great, but it's much better than not having tuple syntax :-)
>
>

I agree.

>> 'yield' is gogreatod.
>
> I have no idea what 'gogreatod' means, sorry :-)
>
>

An attempt to replace 'good' with 'great' which failed ;)

>> This could be a library type (as proposed before?)
>
> Right.
>
>
>> the problem is to let the compiler knows the value-range in the propagation.
>
> Right...
>
>
>> Yes. Maybe the Python/Javascript 1.7-like syntax
>>       a = (f(x,y,z) foreach(x,y; it) if(cond(x,y)) foreach(z; it2) ...)
>
> Yes please.
> Plus the eager version too that produces an array:
> [f(x,y,z) foreach(x,y; it) if(cond(x,y)) foreach(z; it2) ...]
>
>
>> Since this is an O(N) operation I don't see any reason an operator-based
>> syntax will be allowed, given 'in' is rejected for this reason.
>
> I don't agree. "in" was refused for the linear search because elsewhere the D "in" is known to be O(1). But D operators are generally allowed to perform O(n) operations too, think about the "a[]-10" vector operation.
>
>

Though they have a [] to signify it's a vectorized operation. I mean 
bare operation like 'a - 1'. (Also, using '-' makes it confusable with 
'a[] - 1', the reason why '~' was created instead of overloading '+')

>> Hundreds could be>>  100 :)
>
> Noam Chomsky is a genius and you must listen to him even when he's drunk :-)
>
> Bye,
> bearophile