When designing a programming language, being on the lookout for ambiguous syntax is important. You don’t want to realise down the track that your syntax is ambiguous in some subtle way. This is especially true if it means the compiler can’t decide how to proceed on some important case(s). But, spotting these problems is . . . → Read More: Disambiguating Ambiguous Syntax?
After an untold number of commits, bug fixes and passing unit tests, the next version of Whiley is released!! I am trying to lock down the syntax of the language as much as possible now, although there are still a number of open issues.
Finally, whilst I’d love to say “go and use this . . . → Read More: Whiley v0.3.6 Released!
I’ve been working hard over the last few weeks on the next release of Whiley, which should be out soon. However, I’ve got myself into a little bit of a pickle over the type system (again). I want the type system to be simple and easy to use, but at the same time efficient . . . → Read More: On the Duality of Types: the Ideals versus the Reals
Thanks to Alex Potanin for pointing this out to me … it seems that [[Design by Contract]] is the most requested enhancement to the Java language. You can find the list of the top 25 RFEs here. A nice quote from the feature description:
I find it a shame that all the requests for . . . → Read More: Design by Contract is Most Requested Feature?
Some languages are complex, others are simple … right? C++ versus just about anything else is a good example here. But, it begs the question: what makes a language complex?
So, I’ve just been reading Bruce Eckel’s Artima article on Scala. It’s actually a nice article, and I enjoyed it. But, one thing bugged . . . → Read More: Language Complexity?
The other day I was listening to this podcast over at FLOSS weekly. It was an interview was with Matthew Flatt about the Racket language (formerly [[PLT Scheme]]). The language is a Lisp dialect which was primarily designed for teaching, and subsequently used as a research platform.
Anyway, the thing that is most interesting . . . → Read More: What a Racket!